KAS Magazine, Issue 115, Spring 2021

Wye Kent Archaeological Rescue Unit New Romney Oldbury KAFS Geophysics resistivity survey 50 years on The lifeboat disaster of 1891 The Late Middle Palaeolithic Site THE OLDEST AND LARGEST SOCIETY DEVOTED TO THE HISTORY AND ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE ANCIENT COUNTY OF KENT № 115 Spring 2021 14 16 30 19 HISTORIC DEFENCES COMMITTEE STILL GOING STRONG! 02 | Kent Archaeological Society President-electProfessor Kerry Brown Vice PresidentsMr L.M. Clinch Mr R.F. LeGear Dr Steve Willis Hon. General SecretaryClive Drew secretary@kentarchaeology.org.uk Hon. TreasurerBarrie Beeching treasurer@kentarchaeology.org.uk Hon. Membership SecretaryMrs Shiela Broomfield membership@kentarchaeology.org.uk Hon. EditorTerry G. Lawson honeditor@kentarchaeology.org.uk Hon. CuratorDr Elizabeth Blanning elizabeth.blanning@kentarchaeology.org.uk Hon. LibrarianRuiha Smalley librarian@kentarchaeology.org.uk PressVacant MagazineRichard Taylornewsletter@kentarchaeology.org.uk WELCOME FROM THE EDITOR Welcome to the Spring 2021 Magazine. As the current national lockdown measures begin to ease, we can look forward to cautiously planning and resuming the fieldwork and activities we all miss so much. Moreover, given the restrictions under which we have been operating, I’m delighted with this issue’s content, which is as fascinating and informative as ever. One positive side effect of the current restrictions is that most of us have become literate in platforms like Zoom and Microsoft Teams. These platforms enable the Society to continue engaging with members and the public throughout lockdown. As the membership survey highlighted an appetite for conferences, seminars, and events, the Society launched its own online events series, which have proved a great success. This issue contains a critical statement from the Society leadership regarding the 2021 AGM, which has been cancelled. Alternative measures are in place, outlined by The Hon General Secretary, with new technologies, again, coming to our aid to inform the membership of important decisions to keep the Society running. We also say goodbye to two people with strong ties to the Society: Margaret Lawrence, former Membership The editor wishes to draw attention to the fact that neither he nor the KAS Council are answerable for opinions which contributors may express in their signed articles; each author is alone responsible for the contents and substance of their work. Secretary and Council Member, and Kate Holtham-Oakley, a founder member of the Folkestone Research and Archaeology Group (FRAG), amongst many other things. Tributes befitting both are included in this issue. I also wish to draw your attention to the proposed funding cuts to the 43 UK universities that deliver archaeology degrees. The CBA’s Executive Director, Neil Redfern, was a co-signatory to the letter published in The Times on 6 February. I encourage you all to read this letter on the CBA website. Finally, I’d like to take this opportunity to thank Shiela Broomfield, who is standing down as Membership Secretary, for all the work she has provided the Society and the Magazine over the years. Shiela, and her husband Chris, are responsible for making sure you receive this Magazine: taking delivery from the printers, enveloping and making sure they are posted…all c.1,000 copies! I am so very grateful and wish Shiela well for the future. Enjoy this issue, stay safe and let’s look forward to, once again, getting outside, engaging with and enjoying the history and archaeology of our county. Best wishes Richard Spring 2021 | 03 CONTENTS FEATURES Obituaries – Kate Holtham-Oakley – Margaret Lawrence The Historic Defences Committee KAFS Geophysics Resistivity Surveys at Wye Kent Archaeological Rescue Unit The New Romney Lifeboat Disaster The Fashion of Dating Houses Special Interest Groups – Lithics Research Group – Ceramic Research Group – KAS Pottery Reference Collection Fifth Continent Project Update The Late Middle Palaeolithic site at Oldbury, Kent A Brief History of Rochester Airport, Part 1 Shorne Woods Community Archaeology update 05 05 07 08 14 16 19 22 26 26 27 28 29 30 40 47 № 115 SPRING 2021 6 mi. 10 km 22 29 14 30 47 19 40 President’s Column An Interview with... Hugh Dennis Notices Membership Matters REGULAR 04 38 43 48 04 | Kent Archaeological Society There has been little activity in terms of digs and events since the temporary easing of restrictions from the middle of last year till October and then January reimposition of national lockdowns. One side effect of this, however, is that almost all of us have become literate in platforms like Zoom and Teams. Once Skype was the cutting edge of video conferencing and communication. Now, there are a plethora of new means to speak to people. It is possible to sit at home and attend, subject to time difference, events in Asia in the morning and the US at night. Even as restrictions ease, it is likely that these innovations are here to stay. Nothing, of course, should and could replace human interaction at actual events. There are now other options, and sensible deployment means that we can benefit from a far richer and wider range of events. We can even, up to a point, reduce the carbon imprint of these. It is a small benefit after the last few challenging months, in which so much has been lost. But at the very least, and in a small way, it is something. The membership survey that so many people kindly participated in last year showed that there is an appetite for conferences, and seminars, and events. As a charity, education is the most direct public benefit a society like ours can give. The question is, how best to do this, and for whom? There is also, of course, the associated problem we are thinking about now of how to resource this. The Society at the moment relies wholly on voluntary work. To be more effective and undertake the increasing number of tasks we have to do, that will need to change. The positive news is that there is a good-sized audience for the kind of events our society puts on. In early 2021, the Society decided to put on a series of online events. The first, in early February, with the Editor of this Magazine, and Trustee, Richard Taylor, addressed the contentious issue of where Caesar landed in Kent. As Richard said in the talk, people have continued to be fascinated by the possibilities of where this great figure arrived simply because of his enduring fame and immense impact on subsequent history. The traces left by the two forays, however, are faint, and Richard, who participated in the major dig in Pegwell Bay in 2017, did not overstate the case. What became clear from his talk, attended by 100 people, was that while some fresh evidence had come to light, the question was still an open one. The hosting of this event certainly taught us something. There were the inevitable teething issues. We couldn’t accommodate all the people that wanted to attend. But on the whole, the feedback was very positive. And the most important thing – that there was indeed demand for this sort of activity – meant that we could then arrange a second event in March. Fellow trustee PRESIDENT’S COLUMN Kerry BrownSheila Sweetingburgh talked of the single painted pillar with scenes from Christ’s life in St Mary’s Church, Faversham. The more recent and better-documented subject of her talk meant that from a single image, only rediscovered in the last century or so, she was able to construct a social world wholly different, but of course still intimately linked, to our own. This was one where this one image was part of a pattern of ritual, activity, and organised religious experience, which could be constructed from the contents, the location and even the possibility of this single image. The new Teams platform for this event meant we were able to accommodate everyone. We have also managed to put the recordings of these events on our YouTube Channel, meaning there is even greater exposure. Members are encouraged to go to the site, if they haven’t already, and enjoy the talks we are putting up there. In the coming months, we will have talks on underground Kent, on the Roman Villa at Snodland, and on community archaeology, and our holdings in Maidstone Museum and elsewhere. We hope, long after the pandemic is finally under control and we have returned to some level of normality, that a blend of online and real events will enrich and diversify our educational work. We are very grateful for the support of our members and their engagement with our work, both in writing, online and in person. Any ideas for events that we should look to do in the future, and even better, any offers of actually doing one of these events, would be very welcome. I am looking forward to seeing you when the KAS returns to normal operations as soon as we can. Best wishes, Kerry BrownPresident-elect Spring 2021 | 05 OBITUARIES KATE HOLTHAM–OAKLEY The archaeology, history and heritage of Kent has long been well-served by volunteers committed to discovery, recording, galvanizing others, and promoting the past for the education of the wider community; Kate was an outstanding contributor in these respects. For these reasons, her passing has been a great loss to the exploration of Kent’s past. This loss, however, is felt the more acutely by those who knew and worked with her, for reason of the warmth and humour of her personality, and the ‘can do’ nature and the enthusiasm with which she approached her work. She was quick to welcome and involve all-comers, to instruct and to share her growing knowledge. In consequence, Kate became a valued communicator and projector of what the archaeological finds and discoveries in Kent and beyond could convey. Born in the mid-60s to a Forces family, Kate’s earlier life saw her experience various homes in Britain and overseas. Following strong school achievements (10 ‘O’ levels/GCSE Grade 1 passes), her early jobs included the contrasting tasks of accountancy work (she held a BTEC Diploma in Business Studies) and running a bar in the to the influence of cosmology on cultural life, she wrote a critical evaluation in an essay memorably entitled ‘Cosmology and the First Millennium BC people: Cultural impact or just “Pie in the Sky”?’. Her degree was an achievement of which she was rightly very proud. During these studies, and for some summers subsequently, she was able to participate in training digs in Kent and East Sussex, firstly at Bishopstone, under Gabor Thomas’s directorship, and subsequently at Otford (twice) and Culver (2008–9). She relished these experiences, especially the camping, the trowel work and the camaraderie. Some people have suggested that Facebook was invented for Kate to communicate her discoveries and forward news and her views of other happenings in the field of archaeology in its various forms. She certainly worked the software hard, frequently adding her comments, variously academic, insightful, and curious, and (much more enlivening to her social-media followers), more directly frank comments and hilarious observations, all in a good spirit. Around the late noughties, Kate was increasingly involved in projects around south-east Kent. Canaries. Those experiences were both consistent with the person she was, for she employed data management skills in recording and logging finds and in her doctoral studies, while doubtless her down-to-earth manner of speaking served her well in conversation across the bar with thirsty sun-seekers. Back in Britain, she settled in Folkestone and from the turn of the millennium, with two sons off to school, there was a chance of some time to dedicate to her increasing passion: the study of the past. Spurred by her mother’s academic success as a mature student, Kate decided to study for a degree, taking an access course, the completion of which enabled her to enrol for an undergraduate degree at the University of Kent, taking a degree in Classical and Archaeological Studies in which she began to excel. Home life and health, however, presented challenges around this time and those who knew her understood that life was not always easy for Kate; her boys, of course, came first, yet as a single parent, she nonetheless graduated with a strong 2.1 degree in 2007, her often original, practical, approach gaining high marks. Deciding, for instance, to consider the then popular attention in Iron Age studies Kate Holtham-Oakley, who passed away in February 2019, was a dedicated archaeologist, known widely for her expertise with finds, strong abilities in project organization, and as a founder member of the Folkestone Research and Archaeology Group (FRAG); she was, too, a successful University scholar who was studying for a PhD. 06 | Kent Archaeological Society In 2012 Kate began her doctoral thesis examining the Iron Age to Roman transition by examining patterns and variations in the development of sites, with samples drawn from Kent, Gloucestershire and Yorkshire. In part, this grew out of a fascination with the biography of the Folkestone site but came to encompass a wider vision. Kate amassed a substantial amount of information as the basis for this study: combining online research with the traditional trawl through weighty monographs, developing sophisticated spreadsheets organizing the findings. Already trained in Autocad, she was also learning to use GIS software to map her data. At this point (summer 2015), Kate was diagnosed with cancer. Her journey with the disease and the treatments and consequences she endured were little short of ghastly, yet she never complained but instead pressed on. Several further activities stand out. In September 2016, along with FRAG members, she undertook the finds processing for the excavations at the Bourne Park Roman villa. She instructed students not simply on archaeological finds processing but with regard to what everything represented and what could be learned from it. Her plain speaking invariably meant she could successfully convey the importance of the evidence to non-specialists and youthful students in tours of the finds-shed or PowerPoints, and behind this, certainly by the time of her PhD studies, was authoritative knowledge. (At the Folkestone Book Festival in November 2011, she memorably probed Francis Pryor, no less, with a series of challenging questions around the interpretation of prehistory). Friendship and participation with fellow Iron Age research students saw Kate, despite her deepening health issues, determined to host the IARSS conference at her home institution in 2018. The result was a resounding success, with Kate giving her own paper and coordinating the programme in the manner she wished. Kate’s final fieldwork activities were firstly in assisting with the KAS excavations at Lees Court, in the late summer of 2018, where, health permitting, she again led the finds processing, with her shining enthusiasm still to the fore. This, in turn (in 2010) brought her to something that was to be a key element of her later life, namely the ‘A Town Unearthed’ project focused upon Folkestone and led by Canterbury Archaeological Trust and Canterbury Christ Church University. Kate quickly signed up as a volunteer on this new venture. This initiative’s main strand was the re-excavation of the Roman villa overlooking East Wear Bay (aka the ‘Folkestone villa’). Kate was soon at the centre of the fieldwork and, in time, its follow-on, the ‘East Wear Bay Project’, where the focus was upon the Iron Age industrial and trading evidence. Whilst Keith Parfitt directed the villa excavations, Kate was at the heart of processing the rich assemblage of artefacts revealed by the diggers. Over several years Kate, and her team of stalwart volunteers, freely devoted hundreds of days on-site and then in the CAT store at the former Customs premises at Dover harbour, cleaning, sorting and cataloguing the finds. The inspired idea to re-examine the site, partly revealed by S.E. Winbolt in the 1920s, resulted in headline discoveries, transforming understanding of this tip of Britain as an ancient pivot to the continent. It also brought forth vast quantities of finds. Careful researching of the wide variety of freshly excavated items broadened Kate’s awareness, knowledge that she then shared with the large numbers of site visitors. The finds included, for example, huge amounts of roof tile, marine shell, obsidian, rare amphora fragments and the remarkable collection of quern rough-outs and ‘failures’ from the Iron Age milling-stone factory exploiting the Greensand outcrop by the bay. Dealing with (often literally heaving) these finds brought Kate into contact with leading artefact specialists such as Prof. David Peacock and Chris Green. The long hours, hard work and management in completing this processing was a major, if un-sung, achievement wherein Kate led from the front. She was undoubtedly a key personality in the overall success of these two major investigations. The Kent Archaeological Society (KAS) had the opportunity to acknowledge Kate’s contribution. She received the first bursary arising from proceeds of its inaugural Fieldwork Conference in 2014. Growing skills and experience, confidence in caring for finds and the drive to spread the word of discoveries led hand in hand to the foundation of FRAG, which Kate and her colleagues set up in 2012. FRAG membership was in part a formalisation of the dynamic volunteer network arising around the work on these Folkestone centred projects. Kate was treasurer and at the centre of activities, such as assisting and then taking increasing responsibility in the fieldwork that revealed the Roman villa at Marwood Farm near Lympne. The group soon established itself as a vibrant entity that Kate’s input has ensured will have a strong future. Her presence is sorely missed by FRAG, though as the group spreads its wings with new ventures, they readily declare this is because of Kate and in her memory. Not one to rest on her laurels, Kate had embarked on a further degree in 2009, taking a Masters in Archaeology part-time and graduating with a Merit. She was thrilled by praise received from the external examiner, Prof. Tony King and by the fact that, at this advanced level, her overall mark was above average, while she was also running a home and family at the same time. Her MA work included an excursus on the use of the label ‘Celts’, a term and topic around which she was always certain to take an animated view, this being “the ‘C’ word” in her parlance. This degree likewise saw her first research on Iron Age spoons. These curious, castanet-like items, fashioned from copper alloy, often found as a pair and occasionally pierced, held her attention thereafter. Indeed, this was a subject she spoke on at the Iron Age Research Students Symposium (IARSS) that she attended at Bradford University in 2017 (paper entitled ‘When is a spoon not a spoon?’), and which was looking likely to result in a learned publication under her name had time allowed her. Spring 2021 | 07 Margaret Lawrence was a great friend to many of us. She and her husband, Philip, joined the Society in 1974 and made an immense contribution from the outset, quickly joining committees and furthering the Society’s work. She became membership secretary in 1983 and remained until I took over from her in 2001. Undaunted after eighteen years’ service in that post(!), she continued as a valuable member of Council until 2006. People mattered to Margaret. She enjoyed organising many events, including barbecues, strawberry cream teas and many unforgettable Christmas socials, which magically combined her love of early choral music and chatting to members. I especially enjoyed her company while driving to meetings. Her conversations were always so interesting, covering all aspects of local history, especially in her beloved village of East Peckham. Margaret was also interested in genealogy which she delighted in discussing with my husband, Chris. Amongst her achievements was initiating the setting up of the East Peckham Historical Society, which is still thriving. She wrote many very informative books which were thoroughly researched but written in an easy, confident style. Whenever I think of Margaret, her wonderful sense of humour combined with patient kindness and care come to mind; aspects of her personality that we shall all miss. The love and pride in her family was very evident, and I certainly valued her friendship and help with all things. She and Philip had been married for 71 years, a tremendous personal achievement. She leaves behind an increasingly frail (but well cared for) husband, a large extended family and a substantial local history archive. By Shiela Broomfield with great help from Kate Kersey Later, in the autumn, she once more ran finds processing activities, this time at Folkestone vicarage, as part of the Finding Eanswythe Community Project, where she also wielded her trowel. Till the end, her maxim was taken from Monty Python: always look on the bright side. Kate was a person to see things through. Nothing would have been more fulfilling for her, her family and friends, to have seen the day she became a Doctor of Archaeology. That achievement was not to be, but a great many undertakings she did see through to thorough completion. She took a responsible attitude and always set her personal standards high, doing her utmost to raise others to such levels. It was through her goodwill, generous manner and unique personality that she came to be loved by the broad community that shared many days and experiences with her, by the cliff, in the store, or in the classroom. By Steven Willis MARGARET LAWRENCE, 1930–2021 It is with great sadness that I have to advise members of the death of Margaret Lawrence, aged 90. She was able to celebrate her birthday at home last September, but her health had been declining, and she was briefly in a nursing home in Tunbridge Wells before dying peacefully in her sleep. 08 | Kent Archaeological Society THE HISTORIC DEFENCES COMMITTEE I am grateful to Colin and Sean Welch, Robert Hall, Paul Tritton and Clive Holden for compiling their informative reports of their trecent work on Kent’s historic defences which appeared in the Spring 2020 (No. 113) issue of the Society’s Newsletter. I hope that these will encourage others to want to find out more about this fascinating subject. These reports appeared against the background of my having to step down, without notice, as Chair of the Historic Defences Committee (HDC) following sudden health issues and an expected very lengthy period for recovery, still not over. On the plus side, this presents an excellent opportunity for someone else to take the helm: from time to time, it is good to have a change, with new ideas and approaches. Unfortunately, this has come at the same time as the Covid 19 pandemic which has constrained many of the Society’s activities. The aims and aspirations of the Historic Defences Committee are described in its online site. All periods are open, although most interest so far has been in the post-medieval, especially the 20th century. Much has been achieved. Activities have varied from personal interest projects, and ones shared between more than one member and between members and others. These have been taken forward, with excellent results, through research into archives and fieldwork. But a great deal more is possible, particularly with the decision of the Society to move forward with Special Interest Groups, of which the HDC is to be one. MUCH HAS BEEN ACHIEVED… AND WILL AGAIN MOVE FORWARD By Victor Smith, Retired Chair TopFig 1: Victor Smith, Retired Chair of Historic Defences Committee BottomFig 2: First World War defences at St Margaret-at-Cliffe, near Dover Spring 2021 | 09 Once so transformed, this liberating development should allow for considerable expansion of the membership and to some exciting possibilities. THE GREAT WAR The HDC has been a publication route for cooperative ventures with others, beginning with the article ‘Britain’s First World War Defences’ in After the Battle (2014). A well-received joint conference in 2017 between the Council for Kentish Archaeology and the Society on the home defence of Kent and the south-east during the Great War, followed a report on this subject in Arch. Cant., for 2016, written by HDC members and others. It broke new ground in presenting a better understanding of the triad of Kent’s land, sea and air defence, the findings being of both regional and national value. Not mentioned in the findings, if you placed all the home defence and training trenches in Britain end to end, they would have reached over half-way from the Belgian coast to Switzerland. Within Kent, backed by the home defence army with artillery and machine-guns, there were multiple trench lines and systems. These were at both vital coastal areas and in swathes inland, leaving substantial survival in the form of buried archaeology. This is strikingly traceable through aerial photography (especially LIDAR) and may also be seen from ground survey. Concrete remains are surviving, such as a small number of pillboxes at various locations and a coastal defence battery on the Isle of Sheppey. During this research, it was discovered that a pontoon bridge AboveFig 3: Complex of First World War trench defences at Warden Point, Isle of Sheppey Below, leftFig 4: First World War trench defences, Isle of Sheppey Below, rightFig 5: Pontoon Bridge at Gravesend 10 | Kent Archaeological Society between Gravesend and Tilbury had been an integral element of the defence lines to the south and east of London. A report on the bridge was published in Arch. Cant. for 2019. Air defence exerted itself in the form of amazing lines of concentric defence radiating out from London, leading in Kent to the positioning of 40 airfields and landing grounds, masses of anti-aircraft gun batteries and searchlights, and the first sound mirrors to detect enemy aircraft at a distance. These defence systems would have further evolved had the war continued. Sea defence involved the positioning of defence flotillas, including heavy gun monitors and a panoply of other warships. There were coastal defence batteries, booms across waterways and minefields, especially in the English Channel to prevent navigation of the latter by an enemy. Concrete forts were being built to float then lower into position in the Channel, in connection with net and mine defences. Although not widely known, some Kentish ports saw action, having been bombarded by ships of the German fleet. Naval defence around this corner of England would benefit from continuing research. THE KENT COUNTY COUNCIL DISTRICT SURVEY OF THE 20TH-CENTURY DEFENCES HDC members have contributed to the five studies so far completed of the twentieth-century defences of the county, each having the borders of the council district concerned. For continuity, they have been framed with similar chronological/contextual/analytical components. The Second World War was vividly transformative in the methods of land warfare. Not least was the emergence of the Blitzkrieg form of attack, possible in the event of invasion, with the threat Top to bottomFig 6: First World War lines of concentric defence radiating out from London Fig 7: Second World War anti-invasion defences Medway Fig 8: Second World War anti-invasion defences Thameside Fig 9: Second World War heavy and light anti-aircraft guns Thameside Spring 2021 | 11 of overwhelming shock assaults by dive-bombers, tanks and mechanized forces (although some horsepower could also have been used). In a lethally coordinated way, this method had been effective in German campaigns across the Continent in 1940. General Ironside’s epic creation of home defence stop lines in the summer of 1940, included anti-tank ditches, pillboxes, roadblocks and the first of the nodal points to defend important roads convergences, especially in towns. These systems were subsequently enhanced by an expanded network, including further nodal points, defended cross-roads and villages, with more besides. This was intended to delay an enemy land thrust and to buy time for counter-attacks by increasingly mobile home forces and bombers. There was a vast number of anti-invasion sites in Kent, with a myriad of ancillary components. An exciting possibility would be to complete the study of the remaining council districts and to produce a comprehensive map showing in detail all the home defence infrastructure for Kent. This would be a revelation. If the Great War had introduced the age of airpower into home defence, the Second World War was its demonstrable and dramatic maturation. Unlike anti-invasion defence which did not seriously get underway until the summer of 1940, air defence in the form of interceptor aircraft and anti-aircraft batteries, was in preparation before hostilities began. There were such sites as airfields, radar stations, balloon barrages and more. The anti-aircraft battery is a symbol on the ground of this emphatic and destructive period of air attack and defence. In Kent, although some AA batteries survive and those which had existed in the districts so far studied have been plotted, many have succumbed to demolition. One of the survivals is a heavy anti-aircraft battery at Cobham, near Gravesend. This is being cleared and recorded in a cooperative project between the Shorne Woods Archaeology Group and the HDC. The battle reports for this battery, showing how German raiders broke their formations on being fired at from the ground evoke the real-life drama of the time. On the White Cliffs of Dover, the National Trust has been continuing its conservation of the structures at Wanstone Farm, with many of the buildings of the Wanstone coastal artillery and D2 heavy anti-aircraft (HAA) batteries being weatherproofed and having replacement doors and windows fitted to prevent further deterioration. Invasive plant growth has also been cut-back to allow easier visitor access in future. HDC member Robert Hall has been researching the D2 battery and tracing some of the descendants of those who served there and is currently compiling a book with the results of that research. Passive air defence has left survivals, mainly air raid shelters, whether on the surface or underground. Among the dozens surveyed, one at Dartford still had squares of newspaper used as toilet tissue, cut from the Daily Mirror. Had they been from The Times I might have fainted. AboveFig 10: Anti-aircraft Battery at Cobham 12 | Kent Archaeological Society Sites of the Cold War, a period of a feared apocalypse and megadeath, have been partially studied. The HDC and Thames Defence Heritage have recently cooperated in a new analysis and report on the Cold War civil defence control centre at Gravesend. I’m told that this is the first local bunker of this kind to have been so handled. More work on the Cold War is likely. OTHER ACTIVITIES There has been involvement in the creation and revision of the defence chapter of the South-East Research Framework (SERF) for Kent, Surrey and East and West Sussex. This spans the period from the later medieval era to the Cold War. One project discussed is a revision of ‘Front-Line Kent’ published 20 years ago. This will rely on partnership authoring. A report completed on the twentieth-century defences of Swale district will appear in the 2021 issue of Arch. Cant. Meanwhile, there is a cooperative venture with Paul Pattison of Historic England to report on the later defences of Tilbury Fort in Essex. Leaders of important restoration projects in Kent at Slough Fort, Allhallows (Keith Gulvin) and New Tavern Fort, Gravesend (Sandra Soder) have joined the HDC which also has a delegate (Alan Fyson) from the international Fortress Study Group. From time to time queries about defence subjects are received by the HDC. At least one member has joined via that route. Requests for assistance have been received from those involved with batteries on Sheppey and near Faversham Above, leftFig 11: Exterior of Cold War civil defence bunker at Gravesend Above, rightFig 12: Interior of Cold War civil defence bunker at Gravesendas well as from a developer about a 2,500 person industrial air-raid shelter at Northfleet. I also have files of specifications for the fixtures and fittings of forts which are sometimes drawn upon. Experience gained in Kent can sometimes be transferrable elsewhere. For example, in 2018, I was approached by Dr Edward Harris (inventor of the famous archaeological Harris Matrix which featured in the last issue of this Magazine), then Director of the Bermuda National Museum, to assess and report on their 1900 gun battery at the former naval dockyard for historical refurnishing and interpretation to visitors. This was carried out free of charge. Subsequently, and subject to my medical recovery, has come a request for participation in a study of the coastal forts of St. Kitts in the Caribbean. I had the privilege to manage the Brimstone Hill Fortress National Park on this island 30 years ago and input to the ultimately successful application for it to be granted UNESCO World Heritage status. Most recently (Summer 2020) enquiries have been made concerning some defences in Ceylon and from the United States about the defensive qualities of the habitations of the Pueblo, a well-known Kentish tribe! Defence studies, as with other histories, do not stop at some point in chronological time; today is the history – and potentially the archaeology – of tomorrow. National and regional security for the decades ahead are having to embrace an imperative to address evolving geopolitical and other challenges affecting AboveFig 13: Front-Line Kent, published 19 years ago Spring 2021 | 13 Britain and Europe, cyber warfare and the threat of new weapons technology. Issues relating to the consequences of global climate change may also emerge. Although the Covid 19 pandemic has placed a brake on many of the Society’s activities, when the time is right, I am sure that the HDC will again move forward, expanding its activities as the Special Interest Group status will allow. I shall continue to support it in every way I can. I encourage anyone who might like to succeed me as Chair to come forward. HDC member Paul Tritton’s recent book on the Second World War, Tonbridge Fortress, may be downloaded from https://kentarchaeology.org.uk/publications/member-publications/tonbridge-fortress. This is also available as a free download direct from the author at paul.tritton@btinternet.com. Another HDC member Clive Holden’s new book on the Maidstone Fortress may be downloaded from https://www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/publications/member-publications/fortress-maidstone. Top, leftFig 14: Defence studies, as with other histories, do not stop at some point in chronological time Top, rightFig 15: A coastal defence plotting room at Dover during an exercise in 1950 BottomFig 16: Gun firing at Dover during practice in 1950 ENDNOTE: DISTRICT REPORTS OF THE 20TH-CENTURY DEFENCES OF KENT SO FAR PUBLISHED: Thameside (Gravesham and Dartford), Arch. Cant., CXXX (2010), 1-33. Medway, Arch. Cant. CXXXI (2011), 159-195. Canterbury, Arch. Cant., CXXXII (2012), 153-188. Thanet, Arch. Cant., CXXXIX (2018), 318-321. (Summary). A full report is in Casemate, the journal of the international Fortress Study Group: 107 (Sept. 2016), 46-54, 108 (Jan. 2017), 20-24) and 109 (May 2017), 10-17. Swale, completed for publication. It will appear in Arch. Cant. for 2021. Figures 15 & 16 presented to the author by the late Major E.R.J. Barlow. 14 | Kent Archaeological Society KAFS GEOPHYSICS RESISTIVITY SURVEYS AT WYE By Bill Martin Three resistivity surveys in March 2019, September and October 2020 at a site near Wye in Kent by members of Kent Archaeological Field School (KAFS) have uncovered evidence of significant Roman buildings, including the possible site of a Roman mill. The image shows an overlay of the two greyscale surveys; dark is higher resistivity, light is lower resistivity. Darker areas of higher resistivity are often the result of stone, brick, and other dense building materials in walls and footings. The dark areas in the southeast corner were excavated in 2019 by KAFS and proved to be a Roman-era building thought to be the mill. All of the surveys were aligned on the NE/SW axis of the mill to make it easier to interpret the data. The rectangular pattern at the eastern edge of the overlay is probably an outbuilding or substantial enclosure of dimensions 5x10m. There may be other faint, much larger rectangular features around this possible enclosure. To the west is a dense range of features that are likely the remains of a significant building, although much disturbed by deep ploughing. These may, in part, be the remains of a structure containing a hypocaust floor excavated during 1960s. This building may extend over an area of 20x20m. Continuing to the north and west, there is more evidence of linear features on the same alignment as the mill, and these could be a further range of buildings. A previous magnetometry survey of the field showed some features at the northwest edge, but there are only faint signs in the resistivity. Top, leftFig 1: Started with a building spotted on GoogleEarth with potential leat running north-south. Top, rightFig 2: Resistivity results showing at least 5 Roman buildings including a watermill in the southeast BottomFig 3: Resistivity results overlain GoogleEarth Spring 2021 | 15 Finally, there is an intriguing northeast/southwest linear feature at the edge of the overlay, which seems to point to further demolished structures to the south on the same alignment as the mill and possibly connected to the central features. This is a fascinating site and promises even more exciting results when we can survey more of the area to the south with the farmer’s cooperation. Resistivity is highly revealing of buildings and buried structures but is hard work and frankly boring on large sites such as this. The KAFS members who participated in the three surveys in the cold, wind and rain will undoubtedly be rewarded in a future life. They were Rebecca Parr, Stewart Brown, Zoe Schofield, and Beatrice Nicholas. KAFS plan to continue excavations at Wye for a further two weeks this summer once the crop is in. Please contact KAFS at www.kafs.co.uk for further details. Top, leftFig 4: Previous work on site during the 1960s but clearly not the buildings excavated last year. Top, rightFig 5: KAFS work on possible Roman watermill in same field MiddleFig 6: KAFS excavations underway BottomFig 7: Roman buildings 16 | Kent Archaeological Society By Dr Brian Philp KENT ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESCUE UNIT 50 YEARS ON SIR! AND STILL GOING... ImagesKent Archaeological Rescue Unit hospital and Covid input – the signs were seen by over 200,000 people and we have raised nearly £2,000 This year 2021, marks the 50th anniversary of the creation of the Kent Archaeological Rescue Unit (KARU), the very first county Unit in the UK, soon followed by the Oxford Unit in 1972 and the Norfolk Unit in 1973. These early formations were a response to a national crisis where growing developments of town-centres, industrial sites, motorway construction, massive house and school building programmes exposed and destroyed large numbers of archaeological sites. Government and county bodies were unable to deal with this major threat to the buried heritage. Thus this initiative rescue response in which Kent clearly led the way. With three others, I formed the Kent Unit, a registered charity already carrying out large-scale excavations in the centre of Roman Dover. For the previous 18 years, we had completed many rescue operations, more notable at Faversham Abbey in 1965, Saxon cemetery at Polhill in 1964 and 1967, the Roman Forum in London in 1968, the Darenth Roman Villa in 1969 and then Dover town-centre from 1970 until today. All these operations since fully published. Now in 2021, as the years have slipped by, we can look back on some 800 projects completed across Kent and S.E. London. There have been many battles! The team’s core members gave up their careers, and eventually, the Government provided financial support. In this way, we carried out rescue excavations in the town-centres of Faversham, Maidstone, Dartford, Rochester, Gravesend, Dover and Folkestone and also on numerous sites in the Darent Valley. We also covered the M2, M20, M25 and M26 motorways and many gravel and sand extraction sites. Most of these were grand adventures, except in very severe weather or where developers were less than helpful. The Unit also carried out an extensive programme of education and tourism. Two of our major sites, the Roman Villa at Orpington and the Roman House at Dover, we saved from certain destruction and then built cover-buildings over them and opened them permanently to the public. Spring 2021 | 17 18 | Kent Archaeological Society Due to the Covid pandemic, we have cancelled some of our outdoor projects and turned to increase our publications programme. Hence two new publications and two more on the way. Rescue Excavations in West Kent This new book, of some 44 pages with illustrations, covers three important sites. The first is The Roman Settlement at Twitton, Otford. Here in 1989 the Kent Unit carried out an urgent rescue-excavation just ahead of a housing development. This located 35 important features, pits, ditches and post-holes of Roman date. The pottery ranged in date from about A.D.70–180. Several sherds of late-Iron Age date were also found. These discoveries extend the area of known activity hereabouts. The overall settlement could include the 70 or so cremations burials at nearby Frog Farm. It constitutes a significant advance for knowledge of the Otford area in Roman times. The second site describes the discovery of an unknown Roman Enclosure on the top of Holwod Hill, Keston, just above the major Iron Age hillfort known as Caesar’s Camp. A large, wide ditch enclosed a rectangular area about 100 x 70m, hence well over one acre. This was clearly defensive in character, and the small amount of pottery found in the ditch dated from the mid-first century A.D. The most likely interpretation is that this was an early Roman military site, dominating the hillfort and at a very high point where it overlooked much of the Thames Valley. A signal station here would have been significant. The third site was part of the Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Horton Kirby. In 2016 and 2017 the Kent Unit carried out more urgent work just ahead of landscaping work. This revealed ten more graves of the cemetery partially excavated in 1937-8 under a council housing project. Now a total of 125 burials can be identified, mostly dating from the 7th century. The new work included a warrior grave complete with an iron sword and also a rare sword-bead. This large cemetery, partly matched by another at Polhill to the south, clearly represents a major settlement in the Darent Valley. This new publication concludes with details of how the great Tudor Palace at Otford was saved from severe damage in 1974 when the Kent Unit carried out critical rescue-excavations and then arranged for the site to be bought from the builder. The book is available from the Kent Unit for just £6 with £1 postage. See www.karu.org.uk for further details. The former has welcomed over 85,000 London schoolchildren on special Roman workshops over the past 30 years. The Painted House at Dover has had over 700,000 visitors, the majority foreign and from schools over a longer time. The whole operation has seen the hard work and dedication of extensive teams, the majority trained volunteers, drawn from the whole of Kent and far beyond. Indeed, three of the original team are still working with us, though sadly, many others have inevitably passed on to the great excavation in the sky. We remember them all. In 2013 the Unit won the Queen’s Award for Voluntary Service at a special ceremony at the University of Kent. But one less than attractive innovation is the advent of commercial archaeology, which has led to the introduction of non-Kentish teams often with lack of co-operation, poor interpretation and rather average work. But last year saw a new challenge, the Covid Pandemic. At once the Unit’s outdoor projects were cancelled, a new programme of publication greatly advanced and help provided to adapt to this new crisis. This took the form of creating and erecting new signs for the NHS and raising funds for various health charities; this new form of rescue has been much appreciated. So we now enter 2021 with a positive approach and look forward. Indeed, we can extend a warm welcome to all KAS members to come and visit our Roman House at Dover, reserved as a special day, on Saturday, 4th September 2021. I shall be giving site lectures at 11.30 am and 3.00 pm that day. There will be no admission charge, but donations and book-purchase are always welcomed. Please make a note in your diaries when I shall look forward to seeing you. Brian joined the KAS as a schoolboy in 1954 and is now its longest-serving member. KARU PUBLICATIONS Spring 2021 | 19 THE NEW ROMNEY LIFEBOAT DISASTER 130 YEARS AGO By Rosemary Piddock TopFig 1: Sandal MagnaBottomFig 2: Certificate presented to the crew of the Sandal Magna in recognition of their heroic efforts In March 1891, the New Romney Lifeboat, The Sandal Magna, was launched to respond to a rescue in terrible weather conditions. Three of her crew would die on that rescue. A lifeboat station was opened at Littlestone-on-Sea in Kent in August 1861. The first lifeboat was The Providence, which was replaced in 1871 with the Dr Hatton. In April 1883, the New Romney Lifeboat Committee recommended the replacement of the lifeboat and agreed: “… to accept the offer of Mr Joseph Spawforth of Barbican to provide a lifeboat and fittings for this Station he ordering the Boat himself of Messrs Woolfe & Sons …. The Boat to be named the ‘Sandal Magna’.”1 The Whitstable Times and Herne Bay Herald reported the arrival of the Sandal Magna at the Lifeboat Station in October 1884: “It was drawn from the railway station to the boat-house on Wednesday, and the old boat was taken away, the coastguards’ wives raising a cheer as it left the station.”2 A model of the lifeboat is on display in the Littlestone Station today (Figure 1). The crew of the Sandal Magna comprised trained coastguards supplemented, when needed, by other volunteers, including local fishermen. The Sandal Magna’s first rescue was carried out on 17 January 1885 to assist the barque, Windermere. Following this first rescue: “Mr Spawforth, … forwarded £5 for distribution amongst the Coxswain & crew this service being the first rendered by the Boat.”3 Between 1886 and 1890, several launches were completed, but 1891 would prove to be the most dangerous for the Sandal Magna. Edward Carpenter, in his book, Wrecks and Rescues off the Romney Marsh Coast, records that the schooners Echo and Hugh Barclay were in trouble in a severe blizzard on 9 March: 20 | Kent Archaeological Society “the crew knew it was to be no easy task, but there was no lack of volunteers. At the first attempt to launch, the lifeboat was swept back on to the shores as though she was a piece of cork. A second attempt fared no better; the waves were tremendous, crashing on to the beach from a considerable height. The launchers could not remember conditions so bad, but all kept trying.”4 Eventually, the crew launched the Sandal Magna, but she overturned again. The lifeboat was righted, and Coastguard Bennett was swept out. The crew managed to get him back into the lifeboat. Shortly after, another wave hit and the lifeboat overturned again. The coxswain, Henry Clifton, struggled to control the boat as crew member William Ryan was swept away. The crew then attempted to turn back to shore, but the boat capsized again, and they were swept back to the entrance to the Romney Hoy. Tragically, Samuel Hart and Thomas Sullivan were drowned. On the shore, the launchers had no idea of what had happened. The loss of the lives of the three Coastguards was deeply felt in the community. The Royal National Lifeboat Institution (RNLI) made a grant of £500 to the bereaved families. The Standard printed a letter written by William Cotton, Honorary Secretary of the Sandal Magna Relief Fund, asking for contributions.5 Many donations were made, including one from the Eastbourne Parish Church: “the children’s offertory in the afternoon, being devoted to the New Romney Life-boat Crew Widows’ and Orphans’ Relief Fund.”6 The Vicar of Sandgate, the Reverend H Russell Wakefield, gave a recital of The Merchant of Venice in aid of the Relief Fund.7 The Mayors of Lydd and New Romney presented the Sandal Magna crew with a certificate recognising their heroic efforts (Fig 2). TopFig 3: Grave of William Ryan and Samuel Hart BottomFig 4: Grave of Thomas Sullivan The funeral for Samuel Hart and Thomas Sullivan was held on 17 March. They were buried in New Romney Churchyard. The Hastings and St Leonards Observer gave a moving account of the ceremony attended by many mourners. The Authorities at Whitehall decided that the two coastguards should have a funeral with full honours for their bravery. Officers and men from the neighbouring Coastguard Stations attended to provide a funeral and firing party. The coffins were draped in flags with Coastguard Sullivan’s cap and sword, together with a floral anchor, placed on his coffin. They were then taken from the lifeboat house for burial at New Romney Church. Three volleys were fired over the graves (Figs 3 and 4). An enquiry into the deaths of the men was held at the Grand Hotel in Littlestone. The Hastings and St Leonards Observer reported on the Spring 2021 | 21 judgement and opinion given by Captain Nepean that the coxswain was justified in launching the lifeboat and, although the crew was two members short, this had not contributed to the disaster. Captain Nepean concluded: “I do not impute blame to anyone; indeed it would be most ungracious to do so when the coxswain and crew had made such noble and persevering efforts to overcome the misfortune which they encountered from the first. “In conclusion, I should be wanting in my duty if I failed to express my deep sense of the noble way in which the crew of the lifeboat – coxswain and men – behaved on the night in question under condition of weather such as have not been experienced before by the oldest residents in New Romney. They were animated only by the hope that they might be instrumental in saving life, thus setting forth to the world that highest example of Christian charity, ‘Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.’”8 Two more difficult launches were made in October and November 1891, with the later rescue resulting in the crew, including the curate of Lydd and the son of the local doctor, receiving medals from the King of Sweden for the rescue of a Swedish ship. In 1900 the Sandal Magna was “Condemned and Sold” and replaced with the Sir James Stevens No 11 Lifeboat. Today the names of the three crewmen who died that night are engraved on a memorial at the RNLI Headquarters in Poole – a fitting tribute to the courage of the crew of the Sandal Magna and the fateful launch in March 1891 (Figs 5 and 6). References1 RNLI New Romney Ledger – Minutes of the Committee held on 3 April 1883 2 The Whitstable Times and Herne Bay Herald, Saturday 1 November 1884 3 RNLI Station Register 4 Carpenter, E. Wrecks and Rescues off the Romney Marsh Coast, (1985) published by Margaret F Bird Associates, Lydd 5 The Standard, Tuesday, 17 March 1891 6 Eastbourne Gazette, 8 April 1891 7 The Folkestone Herald, 28 March 1891 8 The Hastings and St Leonards Observer, Saturday, 21 March 1891 TopFig 5: RNLI memorial sculpture at Poole BottomFig 6: Names of the three crewmen engraved on the memorial sculpture at the RNLI Headquarters 22 | Kent Archaeological Society THE FASHION OF DATING HOUSES By Gordon Taylor If you can imagine a time before Covid-19, imagine going to a pub for lunch? My bet is the cod will be balanced on top of the chips. Having a burger? The chips will be in a bucket. Why? Fashion; once one does it, others follow. Fashion has always been with us, and increasingly I believe it applies to the style of houses with dates. In my articles in the KAS Newsletters 93 & 94 in 2012 and survey of Kent’s Dutch and Flemish Gables in Archaeologia Cantiana vol. 136 in 2015 and online, my conclusion was that they were a fashion. Firstly, that despite immigration from the Netherlands from the 13th century to the 60,000 in-comers in 1940, houses with curvilinear gables were mostly built from the fourth quarter of the 16th century to the first half of the 18th century1. Secondly, many brick curvilinear gables were additions to earlier houses (often timber-framed) with straight gables2. Thirdly, Dr E Edwards showed that immigrants would not have been in a position to build new houses until many years after their arrival3. I have since made several excursions into East Anglia to compile datasets to compare Kent’s 180 dated houses with Norfolk’s 210. Both counties have the highest concentration of buildings with curvilinear gables, which differ from those across the North Sea. Having photographed numerous houses with a reliable date, I noticed that the dates generally followed the period of houses with curvilinear gables. By reliable, I mean those houses with a date engraved in a stone lintel (see Figures 3a, 3b, 4a and 4b) or by brick in the main wall (see Figure 7). On holiday in a Yorkshire village during May 2018, I noticed three farmhouses and ten cottages in the area with straight gables that had a date cut into the stone door lintels. All except two had 17th-century dates. Was this a coincidence, or was there a connection with curvilinear gabled houses that were mostly 17th and 18th century? With this research question in mind, I started a new investigation of which the following is a pilot, and I hope others will take it further. Manor Houses of England 1908 by P.H. Ditchfield has drawings of houses with inbuilt dates of 1580, 1614 and 1692. In Vernacular Architecture by R.W. Brunskill, drawings show 1712 in a brick wall, 1677 and 1700 in-door lintels and date plaques (possibly not integral) of 1598 to 1795. All these dates fall in the period of curvilinear gables. TopFig 1: Graph showing rise and fall of curvilinear gables BottomFig 2: Graph showing author’s research of dated houses noted around England, reflects the chart in Fig 1 Spring 2021 | 23 Walking the dog daily around my home town of Broadstairs, I had built up a list of houses with an inbuilt date which made the walks more enjoyable and led me up and down all the roads and paths in the town. On my annual visit to Corsham in Wiltshire, I likewise covered every road in that town to note dated houses to compare with Broadstairs. For further comparison, I made trips to Sandwich in Kent to note houses with a date built-in. I emphasise ‘built-in’ because houses with a date painted on or on a modern tablet or plaque were ignored as being invalid for the purposes of the project. Sandwich seems prone to this: one house has a relatively modern weather vane with the date, another has 1517 in modern style scratched on the door lintel, another ‘c1450’ painted on, but these, whilst possibly being correct, were ignored as only a date in the construction of the house was noted as below. The practice of builders including a date in the construction of a house was noted, and like curvilinear gables, it was believed to be a fashion that waxes and wanes. Periods of greater house building would be expected to match the increase of inbuilt dated houses but does not. Why not, if not fashion – possibly times of austerity? Consideration is given to factors that may have increased or reduced the number of houses being built in any period. These are: the economic situation in the country thus affecting demand, the Brick Tax (1784–1850), Window Tax (1696–1851) and Hearth Tax (1662–1689) and external factors such as foreign wars, the Civil Wars in the 1640s, the turmoil of the second half of the 17th-century including the Fire of London. Top leftFig 3a: Example of Yorkshire date stone – Askrigg 1687 Top rightFig 3b: Example of Yorkshire date stone – Carperby 1772 Bottom leftFig 4a: Example of Corsham date stone – Church Street 1723 Bottom rightFig 4b: Example of Corsham date stone – Church Road 1703. 24 | Kent Archaeological Society They seem to have had little effect, although I only know of two houses dated to the 1640s. There was a noted economic boom after the 1660 restoration of Charles II. The dated houses and curvilinear gables peak around 1700, but other building booms have produced no dated houses. Then, both curvilinear gabled and dated houses seem to virtually disappear, giving a surprisingly uniform gap until a Victorian resurgence in both curvilinear gables and houses with in-built dates – see chart comparing the three towns below. The re-emergence of houses with built-in dates coincides with the re-emergence of curvilinear gables in the second half of the 19th-century (occasioned by the repeal of the above-mentioned brick and window taxes possibly and the Victorian love of ornamentation) peaking in the fourth quarter of the 19th century and the first decade of the 20th century then quite rapidly disappearing again. Victorian dates appear to be most common on schools and council buildings, and as Edwards has noted, on railway housing and better-quality terraces and semis5, a number noticeable in Sandwich. However, in Corsham they are mostly on detached houses. Two dates only are found on houses in the 1920s and 1930s in the three towns surveyed. After World War II, a building boom occurred to replace the thousands of houses lost to bombing. However, in the three towns surveyed, evidence of houses with dates built-in is minimal; no dated houses appear from 1945 in Broadstairs until 1998, on the sidewall of a bungalow at a small estate entrance. None appear in Sandwich (an estate has a metal plaque on a boundary wall of 1948) and none in Corsham except on four extensions from 1964 to 2012. Notes on the three towns surveyed Corsham, Wiltshire. A market town just south of the London to Bath Roman road. Wealth derived from wool, Bath stone on which the tow stands, and several military bases during the 20th century. Corsham Court and the Methuen Estate survive. The railway arrived in 1841, but the station closed in 1966. The survey included Pickwick (from where Dickens papers were named), which is now joined to Corsham. Sandwich, Kent. A once busy port and one of the Cinque ports, now silted up and two miles inland. Largely unaltered being “the completest medieval town in England”, the cattle market surviving until the mid-20th century, a local shopping centre serving surrounding rural villages. The railway arrived in 1881. The survey excluded the remote private Sandwich Bay estate. Broadstairs, Kent. A former fishing and minor shipbuilding village subordinate to the village of St Peters, a mile inland. It became a resort in the 19th century, boosted by stays by connections with Charles Dickens and the arrival of the railway in 1863. It survived the depression of nearby resorts of Margate and TopFig 5a: Example of Sandwich date stone – 1756 showing recess including parish boundary MiddleFig 5b: Example of Sandwich date from 1601 in timber BottomFig 6a: Example of Broadstairs date stone – Stone Farm, Lanthorne Road, 1710 plus list of owners Spring 2021 | 25 References1 D. G. Taylor ‘The Dutch and Flemish Gables of England’ unpublished Chapter 2 page 6. 2 D. G. Taylor ‘A Survey of Dutch and Flemish Gables in Kent’ Archaeologia Cantiana 2015 p.274. 3 Dr E. Edwards, 2002 ‘Interpretations of the Influence of the Immigrant Population in Kent in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries’, Archaeologia Cantiana, CXXII, 275-292. 4 With graph design help from Ian Hinton, Chairman Norfolk Historic Buildings Group. 5 Dr E. Edwards in correspondence August 2019. Ramsgate and became an all-year-round destination for holiday homes, day-trippers and film sets. The survey includes St Peters (now all one conurbation) but excludes the private estate towards Kingsgate. The study of houses displaying the various dating methods discussed now needs be expanded to other towns. However, the results from three quite different towns are, to the author’s mind, remarkably alike and would indicate, like curvilinear gables, a fashion that comes and goes. This would make a thought-provoking exercise for any KAS member interested in historic buildings and could easily be carried out to compare and record against the results achieved thus far. Top leftFig 6b: Example of Broadstairs date stone to added porch with date of 1682 Top rightFig 7: House in Omer Avenue Margate showing inbuilt date of 1652 of brick in flint Bottom leftFig 8: House on Broadstairs seafront showing AD 1896 in terracotta Bottom rightFig 9: New Street Sandwich ‘Built AD 1905’ over a shop 26 | Kent Archaeological Society SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS By Pete Knowles Hi, my name is Pete Knowles. For many years I have been studying Palaeolithic flint implements from East Kent’s River Stour. I am in my first year of a doctoral research project at Durham University; the project seeks to establish long-standing questions regarding these Palaeoliths. I am also the volunteer curator of the lithics collection at the Seaside Museum – Herne Bay and work part-time for a commercial archaeology unit. The archaeology of what is commonly known as the Stone Age has, in recent years, been under-represented within the Society. Therefore, I suggested that a specific research group would be beneficial. The Society agreed, and we are now in the process of forming a group to further the aims of those interested and to initiate a broader awareness in the study of Lithic implements from all periods within the county of Kent. Kent has a wealth of archaeology associated with these prehistoric periods, in particularly the county has some of the countries most important fluvial archives for the preservation of early and middle Palaeolithic flint implements in the deposits of the: Thames, Medway, Cray, Darent and Stour; together with essential museum collections for their continual study. It is in these museum collections that my research has been primarily focused. During 2019-20 I was mentored by Dr Helen Wickstead through the Society for Museums Archaeology. Together, we made a study of the archives and collections within the Seaside Museum – Herne Bay. Within this collection, a previously unknown assemblage of ficron and cleaver handaxes was discovered from a site in Canterbury (Fig 2); fluvial archives with these assemblages are currently contributing a new understanding of the technological developments in early humans, at a key juncture in the transition of technologies. The research has shown that the reassessment of historic museum collections and archives can unlock the lost provenance of artefacts. This research could then radically transform current understandings of the technological developments made by early humans. Some initial aims of the group have been outlined by Frank Beresford and are as follows: • The group should encourage and coordinate active research by its members, individually or in small groups. • To re-evaluate the lithics collections within the county’s museums, engage with those museums with collections and ensure that they are secure and available for study by KAS members. This is imperative as many museums face cuts and closures! LITHICS RESEARCH GROUP Three new Special Interest Groups have been established to help address and enhance the Society’s research aims and public impact: Pottery Reference Collection, Ceramic Research Group and the Lithics Research Group. A brief description of each group and its intended activities follows. TopFig 1: Pete Knowles, PhD student Durham University and curator of the lithics collection at The Seaside Museum – Herne Bay BottomFig 2: Early Middle Palaeolithic Ficron and Cleaver Handaxes from Canterbury: The Seaside Museum – Herne Bay Spring 2021 | 27 • Most of these collections were made in the 19th and early 20th century and are either unpublished or have a limited contemporary publication, which does not include modern approaches. There is an urgent need to reassess them – lots of work for those suitably motivated! • Assess and develop fieldwork opportunities that will secure the provenance of these historical collections, especially those that support chronostratigraphic dating work. • Develop engagement with County and Commercial Archaeologists and professional researchers at national institutions to forward the group’s research aims. • The group should also encourage and support those with their collections to get involved and research and publish. • The group should also seek out other collections held privately by descendants of the original collectors and encourage them to allow access for study and, if willing, to deposit them with the KAS or a museum. • The KAS should be encouraged to invest in giving all KAS members access to research papers online by an annual subscription to JSTOR or similar. This is vital to enable all members to research and publish their work. • If needed, create subgroups for Palaeolithic, Neolithic, and Mesolithic studies To get involved with the group, please contact Pete: pete.knowles@kentarchaeology.org.uk By Gerald Cramp The Kent Archaeological Society is embarking on an ambitious but necessary project to locate and sample pottery found or made in Kent before 1700. In February 2021, the Fieldwork Committee recommended to the KAS Council, and Council agreed that the Ceramic Research Group be established. The aim of this project is twofold: Firstly, I will be leading a group of volunteers from across the County to locate and briefly describe all collections of pottery in their area. This Ceramic Research Group will assemble and publish information on ceramics found or made in Kent before 1700 and advise on the recording, handling and conservation of ceramics. Secondly, Chris Blair-Myers, leading the Ceramics Research Group, will lead the construction of a pottery reference collection for the County using, in part, the information gathered in this survey. Chris has described the KAS Pottery Reference Collection in this issue. Ideally, we would like this group to have a representative in each of the District Council areas and Medway District. These representatives should have local knowledge of museums, professional groups, local groups and individuals who have pottery collections. Their task will be to compile a list of the pottery collections in their area and a brief description of what each contains. I have compiled a list of twenty-two museums in Kent with pottery collections, and a further seven closed in recent years. For example, Maidstone, Rochester and Dartford Museums have extensive pottery collections. Both Thanet and Faversham local groups have extensive ceramic collections. However, I am also looking for volunteers to locate other pottery groups in their area of Kent and email me details of their discoveries. Initially, I would like one volunteer from each district to email me of their willingness to help. I would like to have a meeting with the group in the summer. My aim is to report the group’s progress at a Fieldwork Conference, possibly in the autumn. To get involved with the group, please contact Gerald: gerald.cramp@kentarchaeology.org.uk CERAMIC RESEARCH GROUP AboveFigs 1 and 2: Examples of Neolithic pottery from a recent Lees Court Estate excavation, currently being researched and recorded as a ceramics group 28 | Kent Archaeological Society By Chris Blair-Myers It was agreed at Council in December 2018 that the Society should start a pottery reference collection. A degree of turbulence in the Society’s business following changes in charitable status and the inevitable fallout from Covid 19 restrictions somewhat delayed the project. However, we are now starting to make some progress. The aim is to build both a physical and a virtual collection of pottery that might potentially be found in Kent. This is a substantial undertaking, so we will do so in bite-sized chunks whilst being mindful that whatever is built must apply to all pottery types and periods. A physical collection presents problems not just with the acquisition of sherds but storage and access to them. Aside from curating sherds already held by the Society, in the short-term, we are not aiming to expand the physical collection but rather focus on the virtual collection. This is still a significant undertaking, so the first “chunk” will be pottery from the Roman Period, as these are better documented than some other periods. A start has been made to build a table of concordance between the surprisingly large array of classification systems and coding used by archaeologists in the UK. At first sight, a seemingly simple task. However, classifications are not limited to industries and fabrics but also reflect function, form, surface coatings and decoration. There is also a hierarchy that needs to be considered. For example, a simple “Samian” class might suffice for many users. However, at the other end of the spectrum, we will need to cater to those looking for Central Gaulish Samian fabrics from the Lezoux kilns. Once underway, the improved classifications will form the basis of the online database and the creation of workflow input forms ready for data input. The aim is to build a web page for each type with links to high-resolution images of fabrics. What else should be included on the page is still open to debate. Digital imaging of fresh sherd breaks will be essential, starting with those verified by an appropriate expert. This will require an upgrade to the camera on the Marsham Street trinocular and three additional workstation hubs across the county to capture the numerous dispersed collections. Where is not settled but possibly Thanet, Dover and the Darent Valley, the choice will depend on which members are prepared to be involved and the access to sherds. The physical collection, whilst essential, will very much depend on decisions on the Society’s future home. Neither the KAS library in Maidstone Museum or the current laboratory in Marsham Street are appropriate because of space or access issues. One of the many problems that have been exercising the minds of the Strategy Group for several months. To get involved with the group, please contact Chris: chris.blair-myers@kentarchaeology.org.uk AboveRoman Central Gaulish Samian ware cup or small bowl, courtesy of the Portable Antiquities Scheme KAS POTTERY REFERENCE COLLECTION Spring 2021 | 29 FIFTH CONTINENT MARCH 2021 PROJECT UPDATE By Lucie Bolton Whilst the last 12 months have not been quite the year we had planned for archaeological activities on Romney Marsh for the Fifth Continent Project, we still have plenty to update you on. From fieldwalking and geophysical surveys, when allowed, to finds processing sessions over Zoom, our volunteers have been busy. Before I fill you in, I should mention that I spent much of the last year on maternity leave and would like to say a big thank you to Andrew Mayfield, who looked after the projects in my absence. In the window of activity last summer, we managed to carry out two surveys for our Hunt for Romney Port project and one survey for our Heritage, Geomorphology and Landuse project. All three of these were magnetometry surveys. We also managed to finish our third churchyard survey at St Augustine’s in Snave. Here volunteers made an accurate plan of the churchyard and recorded the location, condition and inscriptions on the grave markers with our Churches consultants Alan Dickinson and Lesley Voice. Once Covid case numbers started to rise, and our in-person activities had to be once again put on hold, our volunteers continued researching or processing finds from the comfort of their own homes. Remote finds processing is not something I would have thought to do pre-pandemic. Still, it has proven very successful, and feedback from the volunteers involved has been fantastic. Of course, the social aspect isn’t the same, but it has kept people busy and, in some cases, provided a welcome distraction. As a Community Archaeologist, making archaeology accessible to all is one of my core beliefs. We have always incorporated remote volunteering into our projects, but the past year has shown us ways to expand this further. I am looking forward to getting back out into the field with the Fifth Continent volunteers over the coming weeks. Indeed, we have a pretty packed schedule to get our projects finished. However, if there is something positive I will take from the past year, it’ll be the growth in remote volunteering, and I intend to make sure we don’t lose this going forward. The Fifth Continent Project is due to finish by September 2021, but we have lots of exciting activities planned between now and then for volunteers to get involved. For more details, please contact Lucie Bolton at: Lucie.Bolton@kentwildlife.org.uk TopFig 1: Volunteer Kevin carrying out a mag survey for the Heritage, Geomorphology and Landuse Project Middle, leftFig 2: Hunt for Romney project survey Middle, rightFig 3: Graves at St Augustine’s Snave BottomFig 4: Volunteers working remotely 30 | Kent Archaeological Society By Frank Beresford THE LATE MIDDLE PALAEOLITHIC SITE AT OLDBURY, KENT AND A MEMORY OF BENJAMIN HARRISON (1837–1921) Benjamin Harrison ran the village shop at Ightham in Kent. He was a prodigious field walker in his spare time, sustaining a keen eye for lithics and antiquities in general. He walked long distances from Ightham, often early in the morning, across the fields and up on the North Downs. His collection became well known and he had many interested visitors. In 1878, he began to concentrate on the search for Palaeolithic implements after William Davies of the British Museum came to look at his flint collection, and identified Palaeolithic implements from the ‘rock shelters’ of Oldbury amongst the many Neolithic specimens (Harrison E. 1928; 81.). Another visitor, Worthington Smith, was more doubtful because of the examples’ patina, but John Lubbock was also consulted, and he confirmed that they were Palaeolithic. On 20th April 1887, de Barri Crawshay visited Harrison him for the first time (Harrison E. 1928; 127). After a few visits and some joint expeditions. Crawshay became a committed field walker, collector and student of lithic material himself working on the North Downs to the west of the River Darent, notably at Cudham (Beresford 2019a & b.) On 27th September 1921, de Barri Crawshay visited Harrison at his home in Ightham to show him some material from his South Ash excavations (Crawshay 1924; Beresford 2019b.) Together they examined and discussed the artefacts that Crawshay had TopFig 1: The Ightham Oldbury Area (based on Ordnance Survey 125000, 1957.) BottomFig 2: The two inscribed flakes from Oldbury Spring 2021 | 31 brought. Just three days later, Crawshay received news of Harrison’s death. Although he was was later instrumental in planning a memorial to Harrison, at home in Sevenoaks, Crawshay’s reaction to this news was to select two flakes (Figure 2), found at what we now know to be the Late Middle Palaeolithic site at Oldbury; he inscribed them both “B.H. Died, 6.15 p.m.30.9.21.” and placed them in his display cabinet. They have remained in possession of his family ever since. The original markings are Oldbury W – presumably identifying the find site as Oldbury West. They are described in Table 1. The site at Oldbury is on the north-east talus slopes of Oldbury Hill, Kent (Figure 1) below Mount Pleasant. On 4th August 1890, with the help of a grant from the British Association for the Advancement of Science, Harrison commenced excavations on the eastern face. He realised that the artefacts he had been finding at Oldbury were similar to those that Édouard Laret and Henry Christy had found in 1864/5 in the many rock shelters near Les Eyzies in the valley of the Vézère, a tributary of the Dordogne in the south of France. In particular, they were similar to the artefacts found in the two rock shelters at Le Moustier in the limestone escarpment on the west bank of the Vézère (Laret & Christy, 1875.). Christy died in 1865, and Laret in 1870 – their book Reliquiae Aquitanicae initially published as LeftFig 3a: The title page of Reliqulae AquitanicaeBelow, leftFig 3b: Biface found by Laret and Christy in the rock shelters at Le Moustier in 1864. (From Laret & Christy 1875, Plate XVII, part two, 78.) Below, rightFig 3c: Biface found by Laret and Christy in the rock shelters at Le Moustier in 1864. (From Laret & Christy 1875, Plate XVII, part two, 78.) Table 1: The two flakes as illustrated in Fig 2 Number Length (mm) Width (mm) Thickness (mm) Weight (grams) Patination Description 2428 75 55 8 43 Grey Thin secondary flake with plunging end on ventral face and mainly unipolar intersecting dorsal scar pattern. Point of percussion on unprepared platform. Retouch on left and distal ends with notches. 3% cortex on the right edge of the dorsal face broken by limited denticulate knapping. Marked: Oldbury W 30.9.21 2428 B.H. DIED 6.15 PM 2429 53 62 23 51 Grey Tertiary flake with unprepared cortical platform. 10% cortex on platform. Some fissures on bulb of percussion. Small notch at proximal left and larger notch at distal right. Two unipolar parallel scars on dorsal. Marked: B.H. DIED 6.15 PM Oldbury W 30.9.21 2429 32 | Kent Archaeological Society a part work in English in London was completed by Professor Rupert Jones, with whom Harrison maintained a long correspondence from 1864 (McNabb 2012, 208; Figure 3). Christy bequeathed much of his magnificent archaeological collection to the nation, and in 1884 it found a home in the British Museum. Convenient access to the collections and the book in parts enabled British archaeologists to become familiar with the artefacts from the French caves. Harrison visited the Museum on 7th February 1889 and noted in his journal that “Mr Franks kindly gave me specimens from the caves at Le Moustier” (Harrison E, 1928, 144.). Mousterian is now used to describe material from the Later Middle Palaeolithic. However, for many years it was used as an alternative term for the whole Middle Palaeolithic. The area immediately below the rock overhang of the hill at Oldbury produced only Mesolithic and later prehistoric finds. Harrison then moved down-slope where he found Palaeolithic artefacts, including bifaces and some later pieces in secondary deposits. After this, he moved an area below a rock outcrop with overhangs called Mount Pleasant and, digging over an area of 7 to 8 square metres. He found Palaeolithic artefacts as well as fresh retouched pieces and evidence of in-situ knapping. He wrote “The slope of the bold projecting spur below Mount Pleasant lying about fifty yards south-east of the former digging, was next tried, and here success crowned our efforts, for very soon immense numbers of flakes were met with, and in such profusion that I was prompted to carry on the work thoroughly. Some of these were so minute that it seemed as if the place of the actual workshop had been lighted on. The greater portion of these flakes were found at depths varying from 2 ½ to 3 feet: and as a rule, lay at the base and immediately under a gravelly wash.” In total, for all of these excavations, he listed his finds as “49 well-finished implements or portions of them and 648 waste flakes.” (Harrison B. 1892, 354; Harrison E. 1933, 149.). The stratigraphy is the result of natural colluvial, hill-wash processes. Consequently, the artefacts are not likely to have been in their primary context but still close to their original position somewhere on the hillside. Harrison’s complete collection from these excavations, and some additional pieces that he had previously found in the same area, were donated by the sponsors, the British Association, to the British Museum in 1893. The excavated collection included few handaxes or flake tools of the ‘rock shelter’ type, so Harrison felt it necessary to supplement the collection with ‘rock shelter’ types from his own earlier collecting on the hillslope. The British Museum’s accession numbers for the Oldbury collection are 93 3-23 numbers 1 to 34. In addition, there are over 500 associated but unregistered pieces. The Museum described Harrison’s finds as Mousterian (Smith 1911, 68; 1926, 77.). In 1998, Jill Cook and Roger Jacobi re-sorted the Harrison collection at the British Museum based on techno-typological analysis and the condition TopFig 4: Benjamin Harrison by the rock overhang below Mount Pleasant at Oldbury in 1893 Middle, leftFig 5a: Fig 5a - One of four Mousterian Bifaces from Oldbury, now in the British Museum; 93 3-23 2. (Courtesy of the trustees of the British Museum) Middle, rightFig 5b: One of four Mousterian Bifaces from Oldbury, now in the British Museum; 93 3-23 5. (Courtesy of the trustees of the British Museum) Bottom, leftFig 5c: One of four Mousterian Bifaces from Oldbury, now in the British Museum; 93 3-23 11. (Courtesy of the trustees of the British Museum) Bottom, rightFig 5d: Fig 5d - One of four Mousterian Bifaces from Oldbury, now in the British Museum; 93 3-23 16. (Courtesy of the trustees of the British Museum) Spring 2021 | 33 of the artefacts, and divided it into eight distinct groups. They based their selection on Harrison’s descriptions of his fieldwork in published and archival sources, as well as his known opinions about the age of the material, which had been influenced by the Mousterian material in the Christy Collection and Joseph Prestwich (Cook & Jacobi 1998, 125.). They identified two of the groups, numbered 6 and 8, as the most likely Mousterian artefacts. Group 6 included 68 objects, several of which have come to characterise the Middle Palaeolithic from Oldbury. However, their abraded condition and markings implied that these artefacts were the ‘rock shelter’ specimens that Harrison had collected from the hillslope before the excavations. The group includes 12 bifaces (four are illustrated in Figure 5) and 22 retouched tools and debitage. Group 8 contained the ‘fresh’ excavated finds from his final site below Mount Pleasant. This group includes 22 retouched tools and 302 pieces of debitage. There were three small biface fragments, 25 biface thinning flakes as well as five scrapers, three of which were broken fragments. The rest of the tools were minimally retouched flakes. However, the careful analysis revealed that the remainder of the debitage was indicative of discoidal core technology. Discoidal core technology is a deliberate and patterned method of allowing the removal of many flakes of varied but predetermined form from cores with a circular contour or a disc shape. Two types of flakes are recognised as the outcome of this technology – centripetal flakes with the axis of removal passing through the centre of the convex face and chordal flakes where the axis is offset. 36 chordal flakes and 136 debitage flakes, including centripetal flakes were recognised in Harrison’s material excavated from his site below Mount Pleasant. Two almost exhausted discoid cores were also identified; this was the first time this technology had been recognised at a British site. It had only just been recognised in France (Boëda 1993, 392; Lochy et al. 1994, 20.). Cook and Jacobi (1998, 131) concluded that the material in group eight indicates some biface manufacture and the presence of discoidal technology. They also noted the reliability of Harrison’s accounts of his finds both in the published report (Harrison Above, leftFig 6a: Oldbury ‘Group 8’ debitage flakes. (Courtesy of the trustees of the British Museum.) Above, rightFig 6b: Oldbury ‘Group 8’ debitage flakes. (Courtesy of the trustees of the British Museum.) BelowFig 7a: Plan-view and cross-sections of a discoidal core BottomFig 7b: The method of flake removal X is the plane of detachment and Y is the axis of removal 34 | Kent Archaeological Society B. 1892) and his unpublished notes. Overall they concluded that typologically the group six and group eight material, none of which came from the rock shelter, was Mousterian, especially the bifaces. The discoidal technology is not chronologically specific as it also appears earlier than MIS 3. However, the group eight assemblage includes 25 biface thinning flakes, so it can be suggested that their manufacture and use of discoidal core technology was contemporary at Oldbury. There are currently no other means of dating the Oldbury site. Both of the flakes marked Oldbury W. Figure 2 displays characteristics of discoidal technology. 2428 (left) has cortex along one edge, indicating that it is a possible chordal flake. It also has an intersecting dorsal scar pattern and an unprepared platform showing only a point of percussion. 2429 (right) is wider than it is long. 57 per cent of the measurable Group 8 debitage has similar characteristics of centripetal flakes. This form is caused by the core surface’s convexity, which limits the extension of force from the knapper’s blow. The form also exhibits an unprepared thickly cortical platform and scaring on the bulb on the ventral face, which is frequently produced by the direct hard hammer percussion used for discoidal core technology. So the two flakes could be added to the evidence for discoidal core technology at Oldbury. However, the location of Oldbury W. is unknown, though Harrison did write in the 1892 report of his excavations: “Similar conditions to this appear on the North West side of Oldbury Hill near to an outcrop of rock; and at various times implements have been found nearby.” A picture of this rock overhang was included by Sir Edward Harrison, Benjamin’s son, in Archaeologia Cantiana 45. Joseph Prestwich (1812–1896) was a near neighbour of Harrison who lived in Shoreham, Kent. Initially a wine-merchant, after retiring to Shoreham Prestwick, became a Professor of Geology at Oxford University, based on his reputation as the greatest early expert on Pleistocene gravels, particularly in London and the Thames Valley. It was during a visit by Prestwich with John Evans to Boucher de Perthes in the Somme valley in 1859 that the antiquity of Palaeolithic material had been established. Harrison met Prestwich in August 1879 at Prestwick’s home ‘Darent Hulme’ in Shoreham (Prestwich, 1899.) During this meeting, Prestwich used the Darent valley to indicate the equivalent height of the high-level Somme gravels. TopFig 8: Flake removal from Discoidal Cores showing direction producing chordal flakes (black) and centripetal flakes (white); based on Boëda 1993, 392, fig 1. MiddleFig 9a: Four chordal flakes from Oldbury Group 8 (based on Cook & Jacobi 1998, 131 figure 18.5.) BottomFig 9b: Fig 9b - Four chordal flakes from Oldbury Group 8 (based on Cook & Jacobi 1998, 131 figure 18.5.) Spring 2021 | 35 Harrison then realized that some of his finds were from still higher levels and consequently suggested even greater antiquity (Harrison E, 1928, p. 84). The oldest generally accepted Palaeolithic implements came from the highest terraces of the Somme and the Thames. Harrison now hunted out his high-level implements across the surface of the Downs, from within temporary exposures and upon roadside heaps of flint, resulting in the publication of three important papers by Prestwich in 1889, 1891 and 1892. The first two papers focused on the geological associations of Harrison’s ancient Palaeolithic tools, suggesting that the geological position in which they had been found supported greater antiquity for the Palaeolithic period. The implements from the 1899 paper, worn Palaeolithic handaxes from the North Downs surface, were the first properly contextualised evidence of glacial and pre-glacial occupation to be accepted in Britain. In terms of best practice, Harrison was ahead of many other collectors of his day. Harrison recorded the altitudes and geological contexts of his finds, their typology and condition. He marked every discovery with its location (Wymer, 1993.) He also marked their find spots on copies of the Ordnance Survey 6-inch maps. Maidstone Museum now curates Harrison’s notebooks and maps. Consequently, the known concentration of surface palaeoliths from the west side of the Darent to the east of the Bourne, roughly Chelsfield to Borough Green, justified the inclusion of two distribution maps in the Wessex survey (Wymer 1999, 167.) Much of the earliest evidence for humans in Kent may be represented by these stray handaxes initially found by Benjamin Harrison on the surface of the Clay-with-flints deposits, which cap the North Downs along the likely route of early migration (McNabb 2009,114; Blundell 2019, 241.). However, as well as worn handaxes, Harrison had also discovered rich dark brown heavily worn flints – later known as eoliths – from deposits that seemed to have no connection with the river drifts below. These were suggested as the earlier precursor of Palaeolithic handaxes. In 1888 Prestwich accepted the validity of eoliths, so they were also included in his papers (Harrison E, 1928,133.) His third paper (Prestwich, 1892) opened a long-running controversy on the supposed human workmanship of the eoliths. They are now considered to be the product of natural geological forces. Still, they continued to preoccupy Harrison until his death in 1921 and his name remains closely associated with them. (O’Connor 2003, 256; 2007, 131; Ellen & Muthana 2010, 346; McNabb 2012, 205; Muthana & Ellen, 2020, 1.). An interesting homemade calendar from the year 1924 was recently found among the papers of Raymond Crawshay, the son of de Barri Crawshay. The inscription on the back shows that Raymond and his second wife Lilian gave it to de Barri for Christmas 1923. The photo on the front shows the finds from Crawshay’s 1921 excavation at South Ash – Eoliths (Figure 12) Crawshay’s paper on these excavations was published in 1924, but it was also the year he died. TopFig 10: The Rock Overhang on the west side of Oldbury in the 1930s. The two Crawshay discoidal flakes from Oldbury may have been found in this area (From Archaeologia Cantiana 45 19)MiddleFig 11a: 1924 calendar BottomFig 11b: The inscription on the back of the 1924 calendar 36 | Kent Archaeological Society The calendar photo shows the most important finds that Crawshay took to show Harrison when he visited him for the last time in 1921. Crawshay wrote about this visit in his report (Crawshay 1924, 162): “One of the most interesting features connected with this Pit is the fact that Harrison lived to see Eoliths found ‘in situ’ under the surface position where he first discovered them. His delight was great, he examined all the finds with as keen an eye as ever, but his age and health prevented him going to the pit to extract an Eolith from his classic ground.” There is no doubt that both men regarded the eoliths as their crowning achievement and that this discovery “in situ” was the final confirmation that they required. Did Crawshay leave some eoliths with Harrison and receive the two Oldbury flakes from him in return? In 1926 a memorial to Benjamin Harrison in two parts was set in the north wall of St Peter’s Church in Ightham. In a stone frame above the memorial tablet was placed one of the two flints with chipped edges found by Harrison in a spread of ocherous gravel near South Ash in 1865. They were kept in a box with some fossils for many years, but he rediscovered them in 1901 and put them in a place of honour in his Museum as the first two eoliths he had brought home from the chalk plateau. In 1922, a friend and fellow lithic collector and researcher William Cook, a butcher in Snodland, captured Harrison’s broader qualities when he wrote: “Those whose good fortune it was to have the personal acquaintance of Mr. Harrison will ever remember the delightful walks in his company around the familiar sites of his discoveries; his knowledge of ‘his world,’ freely imparted to others; the charm of conversation, full of wit and reminiscential of past days. Their memory will recall the pleasant hours spent in the little room over the shop, so far removed from common life, with its library and its scores of labelled boxes containing the treasures of the search. The intense enthusiasm of its author and the friendly discussions of the problems surrounding the science he loved and laboured for.” (Cook, 1922). More recently, his wider achievements have also been increasingly recognised. It is now acknowledged that Benjamin Harrison made a crucial contribution to the archaeological record of the Chalk uplands and the debate about human antiquity in Britain. His work excavating the Late Middle Palaeolithic site of Oldbury now contributes essential data to modern views on later Neanderthal occupation in Britain. While his name will always be linked to the Eolith debate, this year’s centenary of his death is appropriately marked by an appreciation of the significance of the full range of his work. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author would like to thank Christopher and Margaret Jones for the loan of the two flakes and for sending the three photographs of the calendar. He would also like to thank Nicholas Ashton and the Sturge Room team at the British Museum (Franks House) for their help. Finally, he would like to thank Ruiha Smalley, the KAS Librarian, for copying and sending material. Top, leftFig 12: The 1924 calendar photo of the 1921 eolith finds from South Ash. Crawshay took these eoliths to show Harrison on 27th September 1921. Top, rightFig 13: The two-part memorial to Benjamin Harrison with one of the first eoliths that he found set above. Spring 2021 | 37 ReferencesBeresford F.R., 2019a. A Re-examination of the Late Nineteenth-Century Palaeolithic Finds in the Upper Cray Area, Bromley, Kent. Archaeologia Cantiana 140, 269 - 284. Beresford F.R., 2019b. Experimental Archaeology using three Palaeolithic flints from Cudham, Kent? - A mystery. KAS Newsletter 112, Winter 2019. Blundell L. 2019. A Critical Evaluation of the Lower-Middle Palaeolithic Archaeological Record of the Chalk Uplands of Northwest Europe. UCL. PhD. Thesis. Boëda, E. 1993. Le débitage discoïde et le débitage Levallois récurrent centripède. Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française. Cook, J. & Jacobi, R. 1998. Discoidal Core Technology in the Palaeolithic at Oldbury, Kent. In N. Ashton, F. Healy & P. Pettitt (eds.) Stone Age Archaeology: Essays in Honour of John Wymer: 124–136. Lithics Studies Society Occasional Paper No. 6. Oxbow Books, Oxford. Cook, W. H. 1922. Benjamin Harrison of Ightham. The Rochester Naturalist 129 IV, 26. Crawshay de B., 1924, Eoliths Found’ in situ’ At South Ash, Kent. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society of East Anglia 4, Issue 02, 155 – 162. Ellen, R, and Muthana, A. 2010. Classifying ‘Eoliths’: How Cultural Cognition Featured in Arguments Surrounding Claims for the Earliest Human Artefacts as these Developed Between 1880 and 1900. Journal of Cognition and Culture 10 341–375. Harrison. B. 1892. Report of the committee appointed to carry on excavation, at Oldbury Hill near Ightham. In Report of the Sixty-First Meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, Cardiff 1891. 353-4. Harrison, E. 1928. Harrison of Ightham. Oxford University Press, London. Harrison, E. 1933. Oldbury Hill, Ightham. Archaeologia Cantiana 45, 142-161. Laret E. and Christy H., 1865 to 1875 (in parts.) Reliquiae Aquitanicae. Being Contributions to the Archaeology and Palaeontology of Perigord and the Adjoining Provinces of Southern France. London. Williams and Norgate Locht, J-C. & Swinnen, C. 1994. Le débitagc discoide du gisement de Beauvais (Oise): aspects de la chaîne opératoire au travers de quelques remontages. Paleo 6, 89-104. McNabb, J. 2009. The Knight, The Grocer, and the Chocolate Brownies; Joseph Prestwich, Benjamin Harrison and the second Antiquity of Man debate. In R. Hosfield, F. Wenban-Smith & M. Pope (eds.) Great Prehistorians: 150 Years of Palaeolithic Research, 1859–2009 (Special Volume 30 of Lithics: The Journal of the Lithic Studies Society): 97–115. McNabb, J. 2012. Dissent with Modification: Human Origins, Palaeolithic Archaeology and Evolutionary Anthropology in Britain 1859-1901. Archaeopress, Oxford. Muthana, A and Ellen, R. 2020. The Great Eolith Debate and the Anthropological Institute. Bulletin of the History of Archaeology, 30(1): 4, pp. 1–11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/bha-623 O’Connor, A. 2003. Geology, archaeology, and ‘the raging vortex of the “eolith” controversy’. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, 114, 255–262. O’Connor, A. 2007. Finding time for the Old Stone Age. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Prestwich, J. 1889. On the occurrence of Palaeolithic Flint Implements in the Neighbourhood of Ightham, Kent; their Distribution and Probable Age. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 45, 270–297. Prestwich, J. 1891. On the Age, Formation, and Successive Drift Stages of the Valley of the Darent; with Remarks on the Palaeolithic Implements of the District, and on the Origin of its Chalk Escarpment. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 47, 126–163. Prestwich, J. 1892. On the Primitive Characters of the Flint Implements of the Chalk Plateau of Kent, with reference to the Question of their Glacial or Pre-Glacial Age. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 21(3), 246–262. Smith, R. A. 1911. A Guide to the Antiquities of the Stone Age, Second Edition, British Museum. Smith, R. A. 1926. A Guide to the Antiquities of the Stone Age, Third Edition, British Museum. Wymer, J. 1993. The Southern Rivers Palaeolithic Project report 2, region 4 (south of the Thames) and region 1 (southwest England). Salisbury: Trust for Wessex Archaeology. Wymer, J. 1999. The Lower Palaeolithic Occupation of Britain. Wessex Archaeology and English Heritage. (free download at https://www.wessexarch.co.uk/our-work/lower-palaeolithic-occupation-britain) 38 | Kent Archaeological Society AN INTERVIEW WITH... HUGH DENNIS Following a successful Series 1 of the Great British Dig, Magazine Editor and TV archaeologist Richard Taylor discusses archaeology with the show’s presenter, Hugh Dennis. Q1. Having filmed series 1 of the Great British Dig, is the practice of archaeology what you expected or envisaged it to be? Yes, I think it probably was, because we have all learned a fair amount about it from shows like Time Team. I have also been lucky enough to visit a fair number of Dig Sites. When I was a kid, we used to drive past Grimes Graves regularly on the way to visit my Grandmother in Suffolk, and occasionally visited it, so I have always been aware of the painstaking nature of Archaeology, the immense care which is taken as you work down through the layers, and the fact that it is actually rather unusual to make “amazing” finds. So I went in to it with my eyes open. I certainly wasn’t expecting to find a longboat under a garden in Newcastle, or the Arc Of the Covenant in a trench in Nottingham. Q2. Did anything stand out to you about the various excavation processes? I think what really stood out for me was how meticulous and patient all the archaeologists were, both in the digging and uncovering of the finds, but also in the logging of them. I also admired the fact that not finding anything was almost as important in gaining a picture of the underlying history as finding something – a lack of finds giving you as many clues to the extent of the structure, or the settlement as anything else. Not quite as exciting though. What was also marked was the absolute commitment of everybody taking part. A cold, wet, windy autumn day spent uncovering a military site on a headland in Northumbria can’t be as pleasant as excavating an amphitheatre in spring in Umbria, but no one ever complained, seemed to be thoroughly enjoying themselves, and loving their wet weather over-trousers. Q3. Throughout the filming of Series 1, we worked at four very different locations; which of those did you find the most intriguing and why? I enjoyed all of them, for different reasons, but my favourite was uncovering the Anglo-Scandinavian burial site in Masham, in North Yorkshire, which I found genuinely moving. My father had been a Bishop of the area in the early 1980’s so I knew it well, but it had AboveFig 1: Hugh Dennis, presenter of Great British Dig [courtesy of Strawberry Blond TV] Spring 2021 | 39 never really occurred to me that the rather picturesque market town had literally grown over a graveyard and that people’s graves would be underneath what are now back gardens, houses and shops. It is amazing how much is forgotten over the centuries as settlements grow. No-one at a burial 800 years ago can possibly have imagined that the body they buried so carefully would, in the future, lie forgotten between a garage wall and a cashpoint, under the market square of a busy North Yorkshire town. Q4. I’ve always considered archaeology to have enormous volunteer and community engagement potential; what did you think of the level of community engagement during filming? I thought the community engagement was the highlight of the series. People were genuinely excited when we asked if we could dig in their gardens – at least as soon as they made sure that we would put it all back as it was, at the end. It seemed to unite the generations with children as excited as their parents to discover small pieces of pottery, and artefacts, and to begin to uncover the story of the places they lived in. And it seemed to bring neighbours together. By the end of a week’s dig, families, who had never really talked to the people 3 or 4 doors down, were nipping in and out of each others gardens, sharing stories, and developing what seemed to be a form of Trench envy. So yes, I was very impressed with the community engagement altogether. Q5. Do you think the public view archaeology in a positive light? Yes, I think so, and certainly the people we met, who came from all walks of life. I especially enjoyed the enthusiasm of a houseful of students in Nottingham, who seemed completely into it. Q6. Have you started excavating your garden yet? Not the garden, no, but metaphorically I have dug various holes over the years, some of which I have found it very difficult to get out of. Q7. With hindsight, do you now regret studying Geography? How dare you! TopFig 2: Hugh and Richard sharing excavation duties in Masham BottomFig 3: Filming in Nottingham 40 | Kent Archaeological Society A BRIEF HISTORY OF ROCHESTER AIRPORT PART 1 (1932–1940) By John Townsend As a retired employee of BAE Systems (and formerly GEC Avionics) at Rochester, I have been interested in the history and development of Rochester Airport. Living in Kent, people often drive up the A2 at Bluebell Hill and occasionally see a light aircraft taking off or landing to the northeast. However, this small airport with its grass runways has an interesting past, and one that is closely tied to the British war effort throughout the 1940s. Rochester Airport is on land between Rochester Maidstone Road and Chatham Maidstone road. Before Rochester airport was ever planned, the land was woodland and fields; at the northern end, the Great Delce Wood to the north and Woolmans Wood to the south. Toward the Rochester-Maidstone roadside was Slippers Hearne wood, and on the Chatham-Maidstone Road, Westfield Wood. A large field was set out in the middle of these four wooded areas. By 1879 the outer defensive forts protecting Chatham Dockyard were under construction. Nicknamed Palmerston Forts, they included Fort Borstal, Fort Bridgewood, Fort Horsted and Fort Luton. Between these forts, a 2-feet narrow gauge railway set into a ditch between Fort Bridge wood and Fort Horsted passed through the location of the current BAE Systems factory, formerly the former Shorts aircraft factory, toward the north end of the existing airport. TopFig 1: 1871 OS map showing surrounding area with overlay of modern runway projection BottomFig 2: Scylla ADJJ under construction at Shorts Spring 2021 | 41 In 1932 Rochester City Council announced an interest in setting up an airport. It proposed to spend £30,000 on the scheme to acquire and develop land between Rochester Maidstone Road and Chatham Maidstone Road. In September 1933 a Mr Auger, the owner of 105 acres of land, was offered £10,000 for the site. Additional land was obtained following an exchanging of 15 acres with the Ebenezer sports club. Soon after, Short Brothers approached Rochester City Council about leasing the airfield. At a meeting of Rochester City Council in November 1933, it was recommended the Short Brothers be given the lease for the 120 acres on condition the land was used as an airport for public landing and flying rights. It was not until September 1934 that the Air Ministry gave the go-ahead to establish an airport. Rochester City Council employed men to clear flints from the field’s surface and create three grassed runways. Before hangars were erected at the Rochester Airport site, Shorts Brothers began constructing the 4-engine Scylla ADJJ aircraft for Imperial Airways. During the winter of 1933/1934 this was the first aircraft to take off on the airfield. Top, leftFig 3: The first aircraft to take off from Rochester Airfield – it could carry 39 passages, but only two were builtTop, rightFig 4: A photo looking southeast of Rochester airfield 1934 with first hanger and Pobjoy worksBottomFig 5: Shorts Scion used for the service to Southend In 1934 Rochester City Council gave Pobjoy Airmotors Limited a lease to build an aircraft engine factory on a 3-acre site on the airfield’s northwest side. Pobjoys made engines for several of the Shorts fighting boats. The first air service from Rochester started on 9 June 1934 with an hourly ferry service to Southend airfield between 0900 hours and 1900 hours daily. The service was run by Shorts using a Shorts Scion and Flying Service of Southend in a de Havilland Fox Moth aircraft. The fare was 8 shillings single, and 12 shillings return, and it took approximately 12 minutes. The Shorts Scion could carry up to six passengers, and the de Havilland Fox moth could carry four. As aviation grew more popular in the public eye, the airfield lease permitted two air displays a year. In 1934 Alan Cobham National Aviation Display Tour came to Rochester Airport on 25 August 1934 and proved popular. In 1937 the Air Ministry approached Shorts with a proposal about managing a flying school at the airport to train RAF volunteer reservists. Shortly afterwards, Number 23 Elementary Reserve Flying Training Schools was formed on 1 April 1938. The flying school 42 | Kent Archaeological Society was set up at the southern end of the airfield to accommodate the school, one administration block and the erection of a single hangar. In July 1938, the school was enlarged for the Fleet Air Arm personnel and RAF using the Avro 504N aircraft. The original hanger was enlarged, a further administration block added to accommodate the increased number of personnel on the ground (Royal Aeronautical Society 2009). By 1938, Shorts began designing a four-engine bomber at Rochester to the Air Ministry specification B12/36, given the name ‘Stirling’. The first Stirling flight was on 14 December 1939. The Stirling proved to be a success for the Shorts Rochester facility, and in early 1941, the Stirling entered squadron service. As a bomber, the Stirling was popular with pilots due to its ability to out-turn enemy night fighters and handling characteristics. The Stirling had a relatively brief operational career as a bomber before being relegated to second-line duties from late TopFig 6: Training School hanger 3 in 1938MiddleFig 7: The first airmen trained at Rochester in 1939BottomFig 8: Shorts Stirling prototype taking off from southern end of the airport in 19391943 due to the availability of the more capable Handley Page Halifax and Avro Lancaster. However, the Stirling helped put Shorts and Rochester firmly on the aviation map leading up to the Second World War (MacDougall 2019). Next Issue, we will look in more detail at Rochester Airport’s role during Work War 2 and its civilian development after that. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Fig 1 – map data courtesy of Google and KCC Figs 2 to 8 – courtesy of Royal Aeronautical Society, A Brief History of Rochester Airport (2009) ReferencesBrooks, R., Kent Airfields in the Second World War (1998) MacDougall, P., Shorts Brothers the Rochester Years (2019) Royal Aeronautical Society, A Brief History of Rochester Airport (2009) Spring 2021 | 43 NOTICES 2021 Annual General Meeting At the time of writing, the country is slowing emerging from the third lockdown, with the Government touting the date of 21st June as being a possible end to the current restrictions. Experience over the last 12 months tends to suggest that as the Covid 19 virus evolves and mutates, government dates are suspectable to sudden and dramatic change. With this in mind, the 2021 Annual General Meeting of the Society, which would have been held on Saturday 15th May 2021, is cancelled. However, there are essential matters that you, as members, should decide upon, namely the appointment of Patrons, Presidents, Vice Presidents, and the election of Trustees. Using our new constitution as a CIO, we can make these decisions by way of a postal ballot. Therefore, in April 2021, the Society will conduct a postal ballot. During April, you will receive the ballot paperwork together with a stamped addressed return envelope. If you decide to participate in the ballot, it is essential that you sign the declaration on the ballot paper. This is a constitutional requirement; if the declaration is not signed, your ballot cannot be considered. On Saturday 15th May at 10:00 am, we will conduct a Microsoft Teams Live Event during which Shiela Broomfield (Membership Secretary) will announce the results of the postal ballot, Barrie Beeching (Treasurer) will give an overview of the 2020 accounts, and Kerry Brown (President) will provide you with an in-depth briefing on the strategic path that the Society will follow over the coming years. In May, you will all receive an invitation to this online meeting, together with detailed instruction on how to join the meeting. The invitation will be in the form of a link to a Microsoft Teams Website; one mouse click on the link takes you directly to the event. Clive DrewHonourable General Secretary Canterbury Historical and Archaeological Society – Research and Publication Grants The Society has limited funds available to award a grant to individuals researching any aspect of the history or archaeology of Canterbury and its region. lt is envisaged that a grant would not normally exceed £500. Preference would be given to work resulting in publication in any media. Please apply in writing to the Honorary Secretary of the Grants Committee by the next deadline of midnight, 30 June 2021. Your letter should mention: • Your qualifications • The nature and length of your research • The title of your project • The stage you have reached in your research • The sum of money you are applying for, including a breakdown of the total, by type of expense • Any additional funding anticipated from other sources • Your proposals for publication • Your anticipated timetable. You may be asked to name a referee whom the Committee making the grant could consult. lf successful, you would be expected to account for the money spent and give a copy of any article, pamphlet, etc., to the Society. A recipient may be invited to give a lecture to the Society at one of its monthly meetings. A summary ofyour research may be published on the Society’s website: Website: www.canterbury-archaeology.org.uk For further details, please contact the Honorary Secretary of the Grants Gommittee: Mr. Barrie Beeching Holly House Church Road Hoath CANTERBURY, Kent CT3 4JT Email: beechings1@gmail.comlssued: 1 January 2021 44 | Kent Archaeological Society LeftFig 1: Cover of War, Trade and the State: Anglo-Dutch Conflict 1652–89Right (opposite page)Fig 2: Cover image for Maritime Kent: Rivers of England Watercolours – Rochester on the River Medway, 1822 JMW Turner D18156 © Tate Kent New Research and Publications Fund By Sheila Sweetinburgh Since Council established this fund in response to an initiative from the Publications Committee, committee members under the leadership of Elizabeth Edwards have been busy working with outside partners and publishers on a series of books that will address pertinent, contemporary issues in Kent history. The committee published one essay collection in 2020, another is due to be published this year, and it is hoped the third will come out in 2022. Each project has also involved at least one conference as a way of promoting the topic and assessing the level of interest among KAS members and those from outside the Society as a means to widen participation and hopefully reach people and groups who might not otherwise engage with Kent’s history. In this short piece, I want to introduce the three books and highlight this exciting offering by the Society, which in many ways builds on the excellent series of books produced by Kent County Council. The Kent History Project series of ten books, published by Boydell between 1994 and 2016, covered the county’s history from prehistoric times to the twentieth century and was for much of the time under the general editorship of the late Ian Coulson, the Society’s President until his untimely death in 2015. Turning to the Society’s volumes, the one published in 2020 is War, Trade and the State: Anglo-Dutch Conflict 1652-89, edited by David Ormrod and Gijs Rommelse (Woodbridge, Boydell). This arose from the June 2017 conference on the Dutch in the Medway to mark the 350th anniversary of the Dutch fleet’s incursion into the River Medway when they attacked the English fleet at Chatham and Gillingham. As a result, three capital ships were burnt or captured, as were ten ships of the line and the flagship of the English fleet HMS Royal Charles was towed away. Making it one of the worst defeats in the Royal Navy’s history, it had significant consequences for the subsequent development of the navy and its dockyards. Thus, it was fitting that this well-attended conference was held in the Historic Dockyard at Chatham, bringing together scholars from the Netherlands and England, the event sponsored by KAS. In terms of sponsorship, it is important to note that the Rochester Bridge Trust supported publication. As Google reports. “This book re-examines the history of Anglo-Dutch conflict during the seventeenth century, of which the three wars of 1652-4, 1665-7 and 1672-4 were the most obvious manifestation. Low-intensity conflict spanned a longer period. From 1618-19 hostilities in Asia between the Dutch and English East India Companies added new elements of tension beyond earlier disputes over the North Sea fisheries, merchant shipping and the cloth trade. The emerging multilateral trades of the Atlantic world added new challenges. This book integrates the European, Asian, American and African dimensions of the Anglo-Dutch Wars in an authentically global view. The role of the state receives special attention during a period in which both countries are best understood as ‘fiscal-naval states’. The significance of sea power is reflected in the public history of the Anglo-Dutch wars, acknowledged in the concluding chapters. The book includes important new research findings and imaginative new thinking by leading historians of the subject.” Keeping with this maritime theme but extending it chronologically and thematically, the second collection of essays, to be published this year, similarly started with a conference held at Canterbury Christ Church University in 2018. Maritime Kent through the Ages, under Stuart Bligh’s editorship, Elizabeth Edwards and Sheila Sweetinburgh, will again be published by Boydell. As the editors’ highlight, even though the Kentish coastline, one of the longest in the country, forms three sides of a very diverse peninsular, close to both the European mainland and London, there has never been a composite study of the county’s maritime history. Through this regional history of Kent as a maritime and coastal county, within the context of its topography and its geo-political relationship to its interior, London and the whole country, continental Europe, and the wider trading world, this book seeks to redress that balance and show that Kent’s maritime history has had a unique and significant impact. The volume takes a thematic approach, within a broad chronology, using three major themes after the introduction and chapter by Chris Young, who sets the scene through his assessment of the county’s changing coastline from the Last Ice Age to the present day. The fourth section comprises individual case studies, and together the book constructs a wide-ranging picture of the forces of development and change over the past two millennia on the widely different stretches of the Kent coastline from the Thames estuary (and the ancient county boundary in London), the north Kent coast and around Thanet, to the ports at the end of the North Downs and the extremes of the Romney Marshes. The first section comprises four articles on Kent’s strategic role in the country’s defence, exploring the development and redevelopment of coastal defences from the Roman period to modern times, including the formation and growth of five naval dockyards. The Spring 2021 | 45 next section of five articles examines aspects of trade and industry from the supplying of raw materials to manufacturing and industries associated with shipping and trade, again from Roman times to the present day. This is followed by the section headed ‘Coastal Communities’ in which the five authors investigate various communities such as the Cinque Ports, aspects of Black History linked to Kent’s maritime past and the rise of coastal resorts with the coming of the railways. The final section offers seven case studies that explore in more detail some of the major themes in the earlier chapters. Consequently, there are, for example, two studies on Kent’s island communities and another two that draw on literary evidence to discuss early modern Dover and Victorian Thanet. The volume concludes with a perceptive Afterword by Margarette Lincoln, who includes ideas concerning potential future avenues of research into this fascinating topic. As well as financial support from the Society, the editors would like to thank the trustees of the William and Edith Oldham Charitable Trust and Peter Hobbs for their support in this venture. To celebrate the book’s publication, the Publications Committee with the Centre for Kent History and Heritage intends to hold another conference in November 2021. Currently, planning is at an initial stage, and details will appear later in the Society’s Events Calendar; please do look out for this. Turning to the third essay collection, this will examine ‘Migration in Kent through the Centuries’ and is being edited by Elizabeth Edwards, David Killingray and Peter Clark. Again, this will be a multidisciplinary volume drawing on the work of archaeologists and historians and chronologically will move from prehistory to modern times. Such a study is especially timely in the twenty-first century and for Kent, which has been the portal into England over many centuries. Most of the articles are with the editors, and it is hoped that the outstanding ones will be submitted very shortly. Consequently, the editors would like to see the volume’s publication in 2022, marked by another conference, to highlight the work’s relevance in our increasingly multicultural society. Events Thomas Becket: Life, Death and Legacy (online conference using Zoom) Wednesday 28 – Friday 30 April 2021 The year 2020 marked the 85th anniversary of Becket’s martyrdom and the 800th anniversary of the translation of his body into the Trinity Chapel of Canterbury Cathedral. To commemorate his extraordinary life and legacy at Canterbury, scholars at Canterbury Cathedral, Canterbury Christ Church University and the University of Kent will co-host a conference, to be held online via the Zoom Video Conferencing website. The speakers over the 3 days will examine the history, visual and material culture, archaeology, architecture, literature, liturgy, musicology, and reception of Becket’s cult at Canterbury, across Europe and beyond, with keynote papers by Rachel Koopmans, Paul Webster and Alec Ryrie. Also, there will be a series of virtual tours, taking people right into the heart of Canterbury Cathedral and the surrounding area, allowing those attending the conference to get up close with some of the stunning architecture and artefacts from Becket’s long and storied history. Cost: £25 per day, £10 per day for students. Website: https://becket2020.com/Email: canterburybecket2020@gmail.com Friends of Canterbury Archaeological Trust (FCAT) and Centre for Kent History and Heritage (CKHH) lecture: Eanswythe Found? by Dr Andrew Richardson (CAT) Thursday 13 May 2021, 7pm online using Zoom In early 2020 a team of researchers, including staff from Canterbury Archaeological Trust and Canterbury Christ Church University, gathered in the parish church of St Mary and St Eanswythe, Folkestone to investigate human bones that had been discovered near the altar during alterations in 1885. It had long been suggested that these might be the lost relics of St Eanswythe, daughter of King Eadbald of Kent (r. 616/18–640). The team set out to establish whether this could be the case. Their findings, shared with the world in March, only days before the national lockdown, surprised many. In this talk Andrew Richardson, who was a leading member of the team, will provide a full account of the evidence along with his view as to whether Eanswythe really has been found. Details: https://www.canterburytrust.co.uk/fcatOr email sheila.sweetinburgh@canterbury.ac.uk 46 | Kent Archaeological Society Sussex Archaeological Society conference: Archaeology and Climate Change Online via Zoom, Saturday 17 April 2021 (09:30 – 16.15) Tickets £13–£20. More information: sussexpast.co.uk/event/archaeology-and-climate-change-conference Centre for Kent History and Heritage: Kentish Saints and Martyrs lecture series Saturday 18 – Saturday 25 September 2021, 7.30pm (notice of planned evening lecture series – circumstances permitting) Provisional programme:Saturday 18 September: CCCU: ‘An introduction to the cult of saints’ by Dr Sarah James (tbc) Monday 20 September: St Martin’s church: ‘Ox jawbones and Blacksmith’s tongs: Saintly Bishops in Early Medieval Kent’ by Dr Diane Heath (CCCU) Tuesday 21 September: St Paul’s church: ‘St Anselm’ by Dr Ralph Norman (CCCU) Wednesday 22 September: St Mildred’s church: Anglo-Saxon female saints by Teresa Pilgrim (tbc) Thursday 23 September: St Dunstan’s church: ‘Conflicting convictions: martyrs of the 16th century’ by Dr Doreen Rosman (tbc) Friday 24 September: St Peter’s church: ‘In Becket’s shadow: late medieval Kentish minor and failed cults’ by Dr Sheila Sweetinburgh (CCCU) Saturday 25 September: St Thomas RC church: ‘The role of clothing in Thomas Becket’s life and cult’ by Professor Rachel Koopmans (York University, Toronto) Donations or any other arrangement organised by the respective churches for their benefit. Details will be posted in due course on: https://www.canterbury.ac.uk/arts-and-humanities/research-kent-history-and-archaeology/centre-for-research-in-kent-history-and-archaeology.aspx Contact: sheila.sweetinburgh@canterbury.ac.uk Surrey Archaeological Society online conference: Shining a light on the transition from Late Iron Age to Early Roman SE England Saturday 8 May 2021 (10:00–17:00) Tickets £5. Book online at: www.surreyarchaeology.org.uk 47 Spring 2021 | LOOKING FORWARD TO SHORNE WOODS COMMUNITY ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECTS IN 2021 By Andrew Mayfield As I write this, we are due to emerge from the latest lockdown and return to volunteering activities. These will be socially distanced, limited by group size, with extra Covid protocols in place. Still, they will allow us to enjoy the health and well-being benefits of archaeology once more. The last year has been a tough one, and I have particularly missed the sense of community and engagement engendered by our project work. Since my previous update, we spent a couple of weeks back at Shorne Woods Country Park in December. During this brief spell, the amazing volunteers exposed an intact section of a narrow-gauge railway on the edge of the claypit. Once posted on social media, this proved to be an unexpected hit and became our most popular post of 2020 on Facebook, driving us past 4,000 likes at ArchaeologyinKent. BelowVolunteers revealing an intact section of a narrow-gauge railway in Shorne Woods In 2021 we plan to focus on the archaeology of the clayworks and RAF camps at Shorne Woods, whilst we seek funding for a booklet on the Park’s archaeology to complement our Cobham Landscape Detectives publication. As Covid restrictions are lifted through the year, we hope to return to our work in the wider landscape, with some follow-on work in Cobham village and completing a collaborative project with Victor Smith at the Lodge Lane Anti-Aircraft Battery. Away from Shorne and Cobham, LiDAR ground-truthing of the Sevenoaks Greensand Commons will recommence shortly. We hope to investigate some of the features identified with targeted fieldwork. The possible pillow mounds on Crockhamhill Common are top of the list. Lucie Bolton has written elsewhere in this edition about the Fifth Continent project. It will be great to get out and about on the Marsh once more with the KCC magnetometer. To get involved with any of our projects, from Cobham and Shorne, to the Sevenoaks Commons, contact me directly at andrew.mayfield@kent.gov.uk, 07920 548906, have a look at our website www.shornewoodsarchaeology.co.uk, our Facebook page ArchaeologyinKent, or Twitter at @ArchaeologyKent. Our booklet on the Cobham Landscape Detectives project is now available as both a pdf and a paper copy. If undelivered, please return to S. Broomfield, 8 Woodview Crescent, Hildenborough, Tonbridge, Kent TN11 9HD I am pleased to welcome new members to KAS since the last Magazine. However, this year has been strange with the Covid-19 constraints, meaning that all conferences and meetings have been cancelled. Nevertheless, I am also sure that you will welcome receiving this copy of the Magazine. The new category of ‘free’ membership for students has proved to be successful – they receive all communications and publications electronically. It is hoped that many will continue as members after the end of this year as younger members are the Society’s future. The ability of any category of membership can join online via the website has also been a successful move. Although not without a few teething problems, the form has been adapted to make the bank details more visible. The whole system should be made more accessible when an online payment system has been implemented sometime in the future. It is also possible to send in a completed form with a cheque if that is a preferred method. This is my final report as Membership Secretary as I have decided to stand down after approximately 21 years. I think someone with more technical experience and with a fresh look at everything will be of great benefit to Society. I wish my successor every success and hope that he/she will gain as much enjoyment as I have experienced, especially meeting members at conferences and other meetings and many lovely notes of thanks on renewal forms etc. Let’s hope that this opportunity will be available once the Covid-19 situation improves enough for safe social contact. I took over as Membership Secretary in May 2001 from Margaret Lawrence, who was a dear friend and has recently died. You will find a short appreciation of Margaret within this Magazine. Margaret had kept the membership records mainly kept on record cards. Still, with the then Secretary, Andrew Moffatt, we changed to a computerised database. Later on, this was changed to a more sophisticated system which will allow even more computerisation and automatic processes. I have been very grateful to Chris, my husband, for the tremendous help and support he has given me. I shall also miss many friends, especially on Council. Remember that without you as members KAS could not exist!! Shiela Broomfield Membership Secretary membership@kentarchaeology.org.uk MEMBERSHIP MATTERS